[Top][All Lists]

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

bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

From: Stefano Lattarini
Subject: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 12:33:33 +0100

On 02/04/2013 10:35 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2013-02-04 00:10, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> On 2013-02-03 21:42, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>>> I've pushed the promised patches to the rewindable branch
>>> 'experimental/preproc' (based off of maint).  I'll also soon
>>> send them to the list to simplify review (I will drop the
>>> bug tracker from CC:, to avoid cluttering up the report).
>>> As usual, reviews are welcome.
>> I like the end result of this series, I especially like that I don't have
>> to type &{this}& anymore.
> *snip*
> Oops, a couple more things. The new naming will clobber
> anyone using a Makefile variable named RELDIR with brace
> syntax.
Yikes, I didn't think of that.  *blush*

> E.g., this previously working code is broken by
> the series.
> RELDIR = src
> It will be preprocessed into
> RELDIR = src

> and quasi-expanded into (assuming $s is empty)
> Not sure what to do about it, or if it matters...
It does IMHO, since the failure you pointed out, albeit easy to
work around, wouldn't be very obvious to diagnose, from the point
of view of a non-particularly-expert user.

What about doubling the curly braces?  As in '{{RELDIR}}'.
Would that be tolerable?  Other possibilities (none particularly
pleasant either, IMHO):


Other proposals?

> Further, the use of /dev/full in the demo test is not
> portable. If I create /dev on Windows (i.e. C:\dev, or have
> it previously, I didn't, but not unlikely), and am allowed
> to write there (likely, on Windows), and /dev/full isn't
> supported (where is it supported, except Linux?), then the
> test falls apart. The MinGW program happily writes "dummy"
> to /dev/full (i.e. C:\dev\full from its view of the file
> system) but the MSYS script does not think /dev/full is a
> character device and it is not be allowed to write to
> /dev/full either, because typically /dev doesn't exist as
> a real directory. Typically /dev is virtual in MSYS (if it
> existed, it would be C:\MinGW\msys\1.0\dev from the MSYS
> view of the file system) so it assumes the MinGW program
> skipped, but it didn't.
> Why use special features like /dev/full in the testsuite of
> Automake? Surely there are better things one can do to check if
> a Makefile works. Mixing in stuff like that is just a recipe
> for strange bug reports and hardship for those on weird
> platforms. The gain for Automake is zero.
> Also, creating the file /dev/full with content "dummy" is
> bad manors, even if someone runs the testsuite as root (on a
> system not supporting /dev/full) and arguably deserves it.
Mostly agreed; I tried to create the test as a reasonable
demo mimicking real-world packages, but I've probably gotten
carried too far, for no real advantage (but with potential
lurking issues down the road).  I will simplify the test.


reply via email to

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