Hello and sorry I am late to the table on this - been a busy week for me.
On 19/02/2020 08:10, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 18.02.2020, 14:19 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
James <
pkx1...@posteo.net
writes:
Actually if you look on the tracker you'll see that I wrote
'Passes make, make test-baseline, and a full make doc.'
This is probably my fault misunderstanding what can and what cannot be
'tested' after 'configure' has been run.
Everything?
For example, as far as I can remember/tell if I *.ac files are patched
then when I run
./autogen.sh --noconfigure
mkdir build
cd build
../configure
make
make test-baseline
and THEN I try to apply the diff, I get some 'error' about the file
being newer (or something, I cannot recall without doing it) as when
you run the patch tests you are not re-running autogen/configure.
Why would you not rerun autogen/configure?
The procedure for a patch would be
git apply --index xxxx.diff
./autogen.sh --noconf
cd build
../configure --enable-checking # and/or other desired options
make clean test-clean doc-clean
CPU_COUNT=9 make -j9 # or whatever other options
CPU_COUNT=9 make -j9 check
CPU_COUNT=9 make -j9 doc
In my experience this doesn't work in all cases. I just switched back
from branch where I worked on the build system and here's what I get
(after running $ autoconf in the src directory):
$ ../src/configure
[...]
configure: creating ./config.status
config.status: creating config.make
config.status: creating config.hh
config.status: config.hh is unchanged
$ make
*** /code/LilyPond/build/config.hh is out of date
*** Remove it and rerun autogen:
rm /code/LilyPond/build/config.hh; ./autogen.sh
$ make clean
[...]
$ make
*** /code/LilyPond/build/config.hh is out of date
*** Remove it and rerun autogen:
rm /code/LilyPond/build/config.hh; ./autogen.sh
Yes this is what I had too (not just recently) and I am sure that I had
some conversation - although I cannot find it on the lists so it must
have been private emails, anyway this was why I haven't been doing 'make
check' but simply applying these 'build file' patches and just running
the gamut of makes minus make check.
If after all these emails there is a better method (at least until we
get the automated build stuff done) I can add this into my workflow.
Thanks and sorry that I didn't think to mention it before more publicly.
James
