[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: proposed patch for "Tests failed with LINENO." Autoconf bug

From: Akim Demaille
Subject: Re: proposed patch for "Tests failed with LINENO." Autoconf bug
Date: 31 Oct 2001 11:46:45 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Artificial Intelligence)

>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:

Paul> True.  I'd forgotten about that.  Here's a proposed patch to fix
Paul> this dead horse one more time.  It uses Sed exclusively, instead
Paul> of Awk.  It also fixes some of the other bugs we've talked
Paul> about, but not all of them.
>> This fix is wrong, what was proposed was better.

Paul> Sorry, I've lost context.  Which patch do you prefer and why?

I preferred the awk one, because it was much clearer, and as been
tested for years: it was in autoconf.  I don't believe the GCS wrt
AWK.  AWK _is_ available.  You just need to be careful about the
portable subset, which is a problem of its own.  But that snippet was
well functioning.

Paul> As you mentioned, the patch that Raja R Harinath proposed in
Paul> <>
Paul> is inadequate, as it can exceed sed limitations.

Paul> But the latest patch that I proposed, namely
Paul> <>
Paul> doesn't have this problem: it uses two small sed scripts.  

Yes, I'm sorry, I thought you used Raja's proposal, I should have read

Paul> Also, it fixes some other LINENO bugs that we've already
Paul> discussed (e.g. $LINENOUGH, $LINENO $LINENO).  When you say
Paul> "This fix is wrong" it suggests that you don't like this latest
Paul> patch, but I don't know why that would be.

These can be solved as easily with AWK.  But again, I apologize, I
really thought you had used the generated sed script.

>> If the only obstacle to releasing Autoconf is your fear wrt this,
>> then please remove it.

Paul> I'm not worried about the Awk+Sed code anymore, as I don't think
Paul> it will ever be executed on any host of concern to the GNU
Paul> project.  (Perhaps I shouldn't have tried to fix it, as that
Paul> just seems to be leading to confusion.  :-)

No no, thanks a lot for insisting, that's the best way to have
Autoconf improve.

>> It's becoming more complicated that it needs to.

Paul> No argument there....


I don't know about you, but I know that each time we exchange messages
about this issue, I smile.  It became quite a game between you and I

Anyway, I think that we reached a point where I might ask the question
again: how about a release now?  I do think 2.53 brings serious
improvements, in particular thanks to the new executables.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]