[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Any plan to handle Bash 5.0 BASH_ARGC & BASH_ARGV?

From: Tadeus Prastowo
Subject: Re: Any plan to handle Bash 5.0 BASH_ARGC & BASH_ARGV?
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:27:42 +0100


On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 9:55 PM Zack Weinberg <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 3:44 PM Tadeus Prastowo <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> > When building
> > using Bash 5.0, make check reports many failures concerning
> > [shell variables BASH_ARGC and BASH_ARGV]
> This has already been patched in Autoconf development trunk. If you
> apply the patch at
> to your copy of autoconf 2.69, almost all of the failures should go
> away.

Thank you for responding.  I already prepared a patch that is
identical modulo ordering to the first hunk of the commit.

> You may also want to consider applying
> which fixes issues that the test suite has with newer versions of
> Perl.

Thank you for pointing that out.  I almost concluded an answer to the
failing test `autotools and whitespace in file names' when I saw that
the commit already gave the answer.

> Note that these issues _only_ affect the test suite; as far as I know,
> configure scripts generated by autoconf 2.69 work just fine with bash
> 5 and current versions of perl.

Yes, that's also what LFS tells people at
by writing: "The test suite is currently broken by bash-5 and
libtool-2.4.3. To run the tests anyway, issue: make check."  But, I am
not satisfied with such a short remark.  So, I hunted the problems
down.  For one other patch I already prepared, I saw that the LFS
maintainer had already got a fix accepted at

> A new release of autoconf is overdue, but currently no one has time to
> do all of the testing that would be required.  If you would like to
> help, probably the most useful thing you can do is download and
> install the development version (see
> ),

I cloned the development tree already.

> use it to regenerate
> your configure scripts, test them, and report whether or not you had
> any problems.  (Please don't just tell us about bugs!  If you have no
> problems at all with the development version that's valuable
> information too.)

I will schedule it for the next LFS build by adding one more extra
step for each source package that has the autogen script.

Once again, thank you for your information.

> zw

Best regards,

reply via email to

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