[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [GNU Autoconf 2.65] testsuite: 229 failed

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: [GNU Autoconf 2.65] testsuite: 229 failed
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 07:01:21 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-10-28)

Hello Gene,

let's keep the mailing list in CC:, thanks.

* Gene Spafford wrote on Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:15:07PM CET:
> On Feb 25, 2010, at 3:40 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > * Gene Spafford wrote on Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 03:56:24PM CET:
> > [...]
> >> 229. torture.at:1549: testing ...
> >> ./torture.at:1553: automake --version || exit 77
> >> stderr:
> >> stdout:
> >> automake (GNU automake) 1.4
> >> 
> >> Copyright (C) 1999 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> > 
> > Wow.  So you updated Autoconf to current version 2.65 but use an
> > Automake from the last millenium, and with security bugs?  Your
> > system deserves a newer Automake as well.  :-)

> It's a long story.   I tried to make the ntp distribution but it fails
> with the current autconf on our system (I don't manage the software
> packages).   So, I tried to rebuild autoconf.  It failed until I
> installed the new m4.  That failed too.   Now I have to install
> automake, I guess.

No, you don't have to.  Not for the Autoconf you're about to install
anyway.  If all you're asking yourself is whether the Autoconf you've
just built is usable, then yes, it is very much usable, even with that
one single test failure.

You may need a newer Automake for other reasons though.

How did the new m4 fail though?  When installing it from a release
tarball, it shouldn't need any of the other autotools.

> Unless these dependencies are documented, people like me are totally
> adrift.   There wasn't any out I could easily parse that said I needed
> to update automake, too.

Fully understood.  Some of the version dependencies are documented in
that Automake macro usually require a specific Autoconf release.  That
doesn't mean we introduce errors sometimes (especially in test cases)
that rely on newer tools that would otherwise be needed.  Sorry about

I think it would be a good idea to have an overview document for these
kinds of things; for a rough guide, the NEWS files of each package
should provide information.

Hope that helps.


reply via email to

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