Hi Peter,
On Feb 6, 2015, at 9:46 AM, Peter Rosin <p...@lysator.liu.se> wrote:
> On 2015-02-06 10:30, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>>> On Feb 6, 2015, at 9:22 AM, Peter Rosin <p...@lysator.liu.se> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2015-02-04 15:48, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 4 Feb 2015, Robert Yang wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> When reporting a bug, please describe a test case to reproduce it and
>>>>> include the following information:
>>>>>
>>>>> host-triplet: $host
>>>>> shell: $SHELL
>>>>> compiler: $LTCC
>>>>> compiler flags: $LTCFLAGS
>>>>> linker: $LD (gnu? $with_gnu_ld)
>>>>> version: $progname (GNU libtool) 2.4.5
>>>>> automake: `($AUTOMAKE --version) 2>/dev/null |$SED 1q`
>>>>> autoconf: `($AUTOCONF --version) 2>/dev/null |$SED 1q`
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps libtool is accidentially executing 'automake --version' and
>>>> 'autoconf --version' every time it is executed? That would certainly lead
>>>> to a huge slowdown.
>>>
>>> That's it of course, how else could the variable be assigned?
>>
>> Only when --version is being serviced.
>
> Are you saying the a script with this line in it:
> foo="`($AUTOCONF --version)`"
> will delay the exec of $AUTOCONF until foo is expanded?
>
> I think not.
I mean a script with this function in it won't run '$AUTOCONF --version' until
and unless `libtool --help` is executed from the command line:
func_help ()
{
$debug_cmd
func_usage_message
$ECHO "$long_help_message
...
automake: `($AUTOMAKE --version) 2>/dev/null |$SED 1q`
autoconf: `($AUTOCONF --version) 2>/dev/null |$SED 1q`
...
"
exit 0
}
Which is what I plan to commit before the next release.
>>> But is it even useful information? I would expect that the autofoo
>>> versions *at the time the package was created* is what matters?
>>
>> The information is useful in bug reports, and our instructions for reporting
>> a bug to the list explicitly ask for the output from `libtool --version`
>> which by including their other autotool versions makes reproducing the
>> reporters environment a lot easier :-)
>
> But are the autofoo versions at libtool time really what we want
> to know in bug reports? Again, I'd be much more interested in the
> autofoo versions used to bootstrap the package. That might often
> be the same thing, but when they are not confusion will ensue.
Please propose (or commit!) a patch that fixes the regression, and also
precisely demonstrates what you prefer :-)
Cheers,
--
Gary V. Vaughan (gary AT gnu DOT org)
_______________________________________________
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
