Hi Bob,
On 30 Jun 2010, at 08:10, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> but with FreeBSD 8.0:
>
>
> 3 of 96 tests failed
> (10 tests were not run)
> Please report to bug-libt...@gnu.org
>
>
> I found that the file tests/testsuite.log w
Hi Bob,
On 30 Jun 2010, at 05:39, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>>
>> I can't reproduce this one. But that might be something to do with the fix
>> I just committed...
>
> I am dutifully re-running the tests with your latest patch
> (d8bdf9339ba7de82f40
With OS-X Leopard PowerPC:
## - ##
## Test results. ##
## - ##
100 tests behaved as expected.
15 tests were skipped.
but with FreeBSD 8.0:
3 of 96 tests failed
(10 tests were not run)
Please report to bug-libt...@gnu.org
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
26 of 53 tests failed
(53 tests were not run)
Please report to bug-libt...@gnu.org
I can't reproduce this one. But that might be something to do with the fix I
just committed
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
I can't reproduce this one. But that might be something to do with the fix I
just committed...
I am dutifully re-running the tests with your latest patch
(d8bdf9339ba7de82f40c49705650506e0cc3f979). Early impressions are
that there are far fewer
Hi Bob,
On 30 Jun 2010, at 01:40, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> As a heads-up, yesterday libtool was passing the normal number of tests
> (usually fails 2) under Solaris 10. With latest changes from today, libtool
> tests are failing badly:
>
>
> 26 of 53 tests
On 06/29/2010 12:35 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 08:30:43PM CEST:
>> On 30 Jun 2010, at 01:22, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>>> I think m4sh can simply use code like
>>>
>>> if ( eval '$smart_works' ) >/dev/null 2>&1; then
>>>func_foo () { smart code;
As a heads-up, yesterday libtool was passing the normal number of
tests (usually fails 2) under Solaris 10. With latest changes from
today, libtool tests are failing badly:
26 of 53 tests failed
(53 tests were not run)
Please report to bug-libt...@gnu.org
=
* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 08:30:43PM CEST:
> On 30 Jun 2010, at 01:22, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > I think m4sh can simply use code like
> >
> > if ( eval '$smart_works' ) >/dev/null 2>&1; then
> >func_foo () { smart code; }
> > else
> >func_foo () { safe code; }
> >
Hallo Ralf,
On 30 Jun 2010, at 01:22, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 05:09:29PM CEST:
>> On 29 Jun 2010, at 21:03, Eric Blake wrote:
>>> Ultimately, I'd like to fix m4sh to make it easier to probe/require XSI
>>> support, but that will have to wait until a
[ please elide autoconf@ from followups, thanks ]
Hi Peter,
* Peter Breitenlohner wrote on Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:36:32AM CEST:
> Here the macro we are using in TeX Live for such tests (C and C++). Our
> purpose is to test properties of libraries that can be either
> (1) uninstalled libtool lib
Hi Gary,
* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 05:09:29PM CEST:
> On 29 Jun 2010, at 21:03, Eric Blake wrote:
> > Ultimately, I'd like to fix m4sh to make it easier to probe/require XSI
> > support, but that will have to wait until after autoconf 2.66.
>
> While that might turn out to b
Hi Eric,
On 29 Jun 2010, at 21:03, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 06/29/2010 12:52 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> i=$((i+1))
>>
>> I think we can't rely on the availability of $((expr)) :(
>
> Is there any shell that supports XSI but not $(()), seeing as how both
> are mandated by POSIX? But we've al
On 06/29/2010 12:52 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
i=$((i+1))
>
> I think we can't rely on the availability of $((expr)) :(
Is there any shell that supports XSI but not $(()), seeing as how both
are mandated by POSIX? But we've already come up with better
alternatives, so this is a moot point.
Hi Paolo,
On 29 Jun 2010, at 15:21, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 06/29/2010 08:52 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>> func_split_short_arg ()
>> {
>> arg="$1"; while test ${#arg} -gt 2; do arg="${arg%?}"; done
>> rest=${1%??}
>> }
>
> What about
>
> func_split_short_arg () {
> rest=${1#??};
> arg=$
On 06/29/2010 08:52 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
Well, really the problem is this:
while $# -gt 0; do
opt=$1; shift
case $opt in
-p) opt_p="$1"; shift ;;
-q) opt_q="$1"; shift ;;
-x) opt_x=: ;;
-y) opt_y=: ;;
-p*|-q*) # option args
func_split_short_arg $opt
16 matches
Mail list logo
