Re: amendments to backtick-removing series

[Jim Meyering]

Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 04/04/2012 04:13 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Andreas Schwab wrote:
>>
>>> Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tests/misc/stty b/tests/misc/stty
>>>> index 97020e8..fa66a1a 100755
>>>> --- a/tests/misc/stty
>>>> +++ b/tests/misc/stty
>>>> @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ for opt in $options; do
>>>>
>>>>    # Likewise, 'stty -cread' would fail, so skip that, too.
>>>>    test $opt = cread && continue
>>>> -  rev=$(eval echo "\$REV_$opt")
>>>> +  eval \$REV_$opt
>>>
>>> That's not what I wrote.
>>
>> Indeed not.
>> Send a patch next time, and I'll be less likely to botch it.
>
> I think this code hasn't been run for a very long time,
> because RUN_LONG_TESTS is not set anywhere.
>
>   if test -n "$RUN_LONG_TESTS"; then
>     # Take them in pairs.
>
> So shouldn't this ~20sec part of the test be moved into
> a very_expensive_ guard?

Good idea.
Wow.  That code hasn't been touch since the last millennium ;-)

> And if that part runs, then the test fails (at least here)
> because of parenb and cread options.
>
> Do they have to be excluded?

That makes sense, since parenb and cread are already exempted in
the preceding one-at-a-time on/off tests.

> diff --git a/tests/misc/stty b/tests/misc/stty
> index 650231f..ef3403a 100755
> --- a/tests/misc/stty
> +++ b/tests/misc/stty
> @@ -79,8 +79,10 @@ done
>  if test -n "$RUN_LONG_TESTS"; then
>    # Take them in pairs.
>    for opt1 in $options; do
> +    case $opt1 in parenb|cread) continue;; esac
>      echo .|tr -d '\n'
>      for opt2 in $options; do
> +      case $opt2 in parenb|cread) continue;; esac
>
>        stty $opt1 $opt2 || fail=1
>
> Have a nice day,
> Berny