automake-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [PATCH] {maint} maintcheck: look for problematic names of testcases


From: Stefano Lattarini
Subject: Re: [PATCH] {maint} maintcheck: look for problematic names of testcases
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:34:26 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.30-2-686; KDE/4.4.4; i686; ; )

[dropping bug-autoconf]

On Wednesday 16 March 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> [ adding bug-autoconf ]
> 
> * Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 06:24:28AM CET:
> > So, can we just quote the argument so it's not detected by m4?
> > 
> >   me_quoted=`echo "$me" | sed 's,..,&@\&t@,g'`
> >   echo "AC_INIT([$me_quoted], [1.0])"
> 
> Hmm, this avoids an error, but also sets several things wrong in the
> resulting configure script:
> 
> $ egrep '(foo-dnl|fo-)' configure
> # Generated by GNU Autoconf 2.68 for foo-dnl 1.0.
> PACKAGE_NAME='foo-dnl'
> PACKAGE_TARNAME='fo--t-o---t-dn--t-l'
> PACKAGE_STRING='foo-dnl 1.0'
> \`configure' configures foo-dnl 1.0 to adapt to many kinds of systems.
>                           [DATAROOTDIR/doc/fo--t-o---t-dn--t-l]
>      short | recursive ) echo "Configuration of foo-dnl 1.0:";;
> foo-dnl configure 1.0
> It was created by foo-dnl $as_me 1.0, which was
>  PACKAGE='fo--t-o---t-dn--t-l'
> This file was extended by foo-dnl $as_me 1.0, which was
> foo-dnl config.status 1.0
> 
> Bummer.  So, back to your patch I guess ...
> 
Hmm... is this an "OK to apply", or an "I'll review it soonish"?

BTW, note that I've amended my patch by adding `dnl' to $(m4_builtins),
as I had mistakenly left that out in my previous version of the patch;
sorry for the oversight.

Thanks,
   Stefano



reply via email to

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