On 7/17/20 10:17 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 7/14/20 9:22 AM, Dennis Clarke wrote: >> >> I was surprised to see many failures : > > I suggest trying Autoconf 2.69b (which happened to be announced about > the same time you sent your bug report). See: > > https://lists.gnu.org/r/autoconf/2020-07/msg00006.html > > Better yet, try 2.69b with the attached further patches applied, as many > of them are relevant to Solaris 10. These patches have all been applied > to the master branch on Savannah, which you can find here: > > https://savannah.gnu.org/git/?group=autoconf
I gave this is run through last night and the results were not thrilling but here they are : ## ------------- ## ## Test results. ## ## ------------- ## ERROR: 508 tests were run, 17 failed (4 expected failures). 15 tests were skipped. ## -------------------------- ## ## testsuite.log was created. ## ## -------------------------- ## Please send `tests/testsuite.log' and all information you think might help: To: <bug-autoconf@gnu.org> Subject: [GNU Autoconf 2.69b] testsuite: 221 222 273 280 295 318 319 320 321 322 323 335 346 failed You may investigate any problem if you feel able to do so, in which case the test suite provides a good starting point. Its output may be found below `tests/testsuite.dir'. gmake[2]: *** [Makefile:2150: check-local] Error 1 gmake[2]: Leaving directory '/opt/bw/build/autoconf-2.69b_sunos5.10_sparcv9.002' gmake[1]: *** [Makefile:1687: check-am] Error 2 gmake[1]: Leaving directory '/opt/bw/build/autoconf-2.69b_sunos5.10_sparcv9.002' gmake: *** [Makefile:1689: check] Error 2 So I guess I can look into the test area for some logs files and what ever was left behind. I attached a tarball that has everything about the procedure and the results. I have yet to go digging in there but figured I would post this first and then climb down into the test results and look around. -- Dennis Clarke RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC UNIX and Linux spoken GreyBeard and suspenders optional