Hello Charles, * Charles Wilson wrote on Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 09:28:49PM CET: > Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Charles Wilson wrote on Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 06:47:10PM CET: > >> Finally, it's not clear in your message: are you saying that *existing* > >> win32 "changes" currently in master are causing problems on HP-UX, or > >> just that some of the win32 changes /in this patch/ are causing them? > > > > Something causes lots of leftover shell temp files, and they contain > > cwrapper contents. These leftover files cause later, unrelated > > processes with same PIDs to fail when needing shell temp files as well > > (yeah the temp file naming is really crappy). Bet it's merely some > > shell bug with here-documents in functions or so, but I haven't analyzed > > it yet. > > Hm. Platforms that are not win32ish should not be emitting the cwrapper > at all.
That's not how these ancient shells work. They actually go ahead and write out the contents of here-documents to a temp file at parse time, not just at execution time. Then, some, like AIX /bin/sh, even start producing hard-links whenever they fork a subshell or so. This was one of the reasons that for var in list; do some very long script text with subshells ... cat <<\EOF ... EOF more script text ... done caused such an immense churn in 1.5.x libtool: the shell would be busy with link/unlink for any fork that happened during the script parts in the loop. I'm not sure whether it's the same thing happening on HPUX; but what I see is that, in addition to creating actual files for here-documents, the shell also has the misfeature of using very predictable file names. Then, sometimes, there would be leftover files from these here-documents. I'm not sure whether they originate only in fatal shell errors from buggy scripts, or there are simply more bugs in /bin/sh. Taken together, and with the me spawning full testsuite runs for the autotools packages on such a system, and each of them has its share of a few thousand shell invocations, and failures due to name collisions turn out to be fairly common, causing the respective script to barf, and tests to fail. 'info Autoconf Here-Documents' has some more information on this, and Sven Mascheck's pages somewhere document another bug with non-literal content in them (worked around by putting the here-doc inside an eval). > Oh yeah...ping? Is the HPUX problem a blocker for these three patches, No. > or can they be considered before solving the HPUX issue? > In any case, here's a quick-n-dirty set of test scripts to help narrow > down the problem. If someone with access to HPUX can unpack and run > 't.sh', and report back the results, we might be able to narrow down the > cause of this problem. (Might need to change the shbang lines to use the > same shell that's causing issues with libtool). The tests all pass with HP-UX /bin/sh and /bin/ksh. Cheers, Ralf
