[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: AS_IF failure

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: AS_IF failure
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:09:49 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

* Eric Blake wrote on Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 09:46:15PM CEST:
> Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at>> writes:
> > 
> > Yep.  It's a timing problem: the `script' from the first test has the
> > same time stamp as the `' from the second test, tricking
> > autom4te to think that its output is already up to date.
> This begs the question - should we teach autom4te to automatically enable
> --force if the output file exists but has a timestamp of now, within the 
> resolution detected for the filesystem?

Hmm.  The question is whether that defeats a very common use case of the
caching, namely Makefile-triggered autotools reruns.  The next question
is whether we should care, or decree that m4 is now fast enough.  ;-)

But I agree that this is a good post-2.63 question.

> >     Avoid timestamp races for updated input.
> > 
> >     * tests/ (AS_IF and AS_CASE): Use `autom4te --force' for
> >     second script.
> >     * tests/ (autotools and whitespace in file names): Add
> >     --force for repeated invocations.
> Go ahead and commit.

Done, and set limit back to 1000.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]