[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFA] Validate configure script syntax
From: |
Paolo Bonzini |
Subject: |
Re: [RFA] Validate configure script syntax |
Date: |
Thu, 4 Dec 2003 14:24:28 +0100 |
> I have avoided AS_REQUIRE on purpose in the case of Autotest: the
> point is that (when someone has some spare time) we can extract a
> small test script focusing on the exact failure. This is what pleases
> people having test suites a` la Automake. We should be able to
> provide this to them. I don't think AS_REQUIRE fits in the picture.
Ok. I'll document it when I come to documenting AS_REQUIRE. :-)
Ahem, does not this go against using shell functions in Autotest? >:->
> The coding style leave the closing ]) at col 0 for long macros.
Okay.
> What is the impact on the duration of the test suite?
The slowdown is not much, but both the speed and the testsuite size would be
improved by adding a separate AT_CHECK_CONFIGURE_SYNTAX macro and using it
specially for tests that do not run configure (if any). Configure scripts
are run without exiting earlier, so given how shell scripts are parsed, I
don't think it is so frequent that sh -n catches more errors than an actual
run. And configure runs config.status so unless it exits early (does it?)
there's no point in checking config.status syntax after it has run. So I
put this in the "to be thought more on" category.
I wanted to commit only the part to extract AT_CHECK_SHELL_SYNTAX (without
AS_REQUIRE) and AT_CHECK_PERL_SYNTAX out of tools.at, but
subversions.gnu.org is down, so I'll ask another question in the
meanwhile... is there anything wrong in this alternative detection method?
if test x"`echo echo yes | sh -n 2>&1`" = x; then
echo ok
else
echo bad;
fi
Paolo