[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Faster AT_CHECK, one less XFAIL

From: Paolo Bonzini
Subject: Re: Faster AT_CHECK, one less XFAIL
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:49:11 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird (Macintosh/20081105)

Eric Blake wrote:
> Now that m4_expand is more robust, I switched AT_CHECK to start using it.
>  I had to fix a bit of fallout - a grand total of two tests (one with
> unbalanced '('

Should we warn about that?


reply via email to

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