On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:34:58 +0200 Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 16:30:59 +0000 > Daniel Stone <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Jan, > > > > On 16 November 2016 at 16:19, Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wednesday 2016-11-16 17:16, Daniel Stone wrote: > > >>> noinst_PROGRAMS = \ > > >>> + $(built_test_programs) \ > > >>> + exec-fd-leak-checker \ > > >>> fixed-benchmark > > >>> > > >>> check_LTLIBRARIES = libtest-runner.la > > >> > > >>Doesn't this have to be (or at least, shouldn't: I can imagine > > >>autotools making it a non-issue, but it is at least unclean) > > >>noinst_LTLIBRARIES instead? With that: > > > > > > noinst_LTLIBRARIES will never build shared libraries. You can of > > > course do that, but it has the usual implications. > > > > Thanks for the super-quick response. This is only used for the built > > tests, so I don't really see much value in having a shared library; > > any space savings are probably obliterated by all the libtool files > > anyway. > > > > I tried both quickly and they both seem to work, given that automake > > generates the rules and dependencies correctly; it's just that it > > looks/feels quite weird. > > Yeah, I missed that and nothing seemed to fail. I even tried to prod it > to fail with 'make clean' and distcheck and whatnot. > > Indeed I think the test-runner is even intended to be built into the > test programs, it certainly won't hurt. > > I will be making that change and check what Weston does. Hi, it turns out that also check_LTLIBRARIES was already building static libs, so there is no change in that. Also Weston uses noinst_LTLIBRARIES with its test suite. I made the change Daniel suggested, add his R-b, and pushed: 06b7c47..aa51a83 master -> master Thanks, pq
pgpsuHRvgUBfs.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
