Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Make test failure on Cygwin

[Ron Parker]

On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 18:23:31 -0500, John Meinel <address@hidden> wrote:

> Ron Parker wrote:
> | On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 15:46:30 -0500, John Meinel <address@hidden>
> wrote:

> | True but dos2unix is a Cygwinism and I was targeting something that
> | would work regardless of OS. Two reasons here.  I use more operating
> | systems than anyone should and I was hoping at some point in time to
> | be able to at least have some of this merged back into the baseline.
> |
> 
> Well, what about this "odd" workaround. "./unit-unidata | sed 's/ / /'"
> You don't need dos2unix, and it forces both outputs to be processed by
> the same command (sed). The sed should be pretty much a no-op, though
> admittedly it isn't quite. Another possibility would be "| grep .".
> Because my guess is that sed and grep will both open their input in the
> same mode.

That may seem odd to the rest of the world, but may be a reasonable
compromise. For that matter, I don't think sed even needs the no-op
replacement. A command with a null script should work, "sed ''".


> | I don't think it would be using the wrong version because an explicit
> | ../libexec path should be getting used to exec them.  However, as I
> | previously mentioned I have not checked to see if it might be using a
> | stale version that already exists from a previous install.

Small typo, s/\.\./\.\.\./. IOW, the .. was intended as an ellipsis,
"...". I was trying to asy it would use the fully qualified path that
includes the libexec sub directory.

> Where does it decide "../libexec"? I know the "make test" command has an
> explicit path to the tla to run, does tla internally call
> popen("../libexec/tar ...")?

I'd have to grep the source and this isn't my machine, but I remember
archive.h contains some of the cfg_... macros that are used.

(oops, cut your question about my archive and gmail doesn't have a deep undo.)

Yes, this is in my archive.  Specifically, check patch-4.

> Well, what I'd like to see is that the Makefile.in files do exist in the
> source repository. Makefile.am can be used to generate it, but that
> should be done by you, it shouldn't be necessary to have autotools
> installed to build the project.

Granted. I intended to get around to this, but was trying to keep my
initial commits down to what was simply needed to support the
pathcompression.  Since I am sharing this with other I wil go ahead
and reconf my archive. But, I'm fairly wiped from travelling and
intend to just unwind tonight. Maybe I will have time to check it in
before work tomorrow.

I was also thinking about what I could trim from the archive. I will
give this more thought later.

> Actually, from what I was seeing, the autotools screwed up more than
> they helped (probably because I have a different version.) If I tried to
> play around with any of the Makefile.* files it would try to re-generate
> and then my build would fail. If I just did a fresh checkout, configure,
> build, then things would work. And if I only changed hackerlab I could
> type make again and it would work.

BTW, my autotools are just the newest from Cygwin setup.