automake
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Automake 1.11.2b test release


From: Peter Rosin
Subject: Re: Automake 1.11.2b test release
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 21:40:38 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1

Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-01-27 18:37:
> On 01/27/2012 05:43 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-01-27 17:16:
>>> On 01/27/2012 03:18 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> *snip*
>>>> And here's from Cygwin "1.7.10s(0.259/5/3) 20120123" (latest snapshot, with
>>>> release candidate "quality", 1.7.10 is coming RSN, as they say).
>>>>
>>>> lzma.test fails for the same reason as above in MinGW,
>>>>
>>> Maybe it would be nice to start working around this before the release,
>>> by exporting "XZ_DEFAULTS=--memlimit=150MiB" in the environment?  If yes,
>>> extra points to whoever beats me at doing so ;-)
>>
>> I'm not bothered enough, sorry, and there should be a way for the user
>> to override in case 150MiB (or whatever we select) is not appropriate, so
>> some care has to be taken...
>>
> Well, the lzma compression has been deprecated in favour of xz/lzip already,
> and the lzma support will be removed in automake 1.12 anyway; so I say we
> stop worrying about this issue until we see a bug report from a "real world"
> user, OK?

Fine by me, I don't worry about this one at all.

>>>> and transform2.test is an old known failure.
>>>>
>>> Has this already been reported in details and/or analysed?
>>
>> There's this:
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake-patches/2010-08/msg00097.html
>>
> Thanks for the link.  What do you think of the workaround provided by the
> attached patch?  Good to go before 1.11.3?

I haven't tested the patch, but if you ask me, I don't like "hiding" this
in a SKIP.  This is another case where a "local" XFAIL would be really
nice.  How impossible is it to introduce some kind of mechanism that a
test can trigger when it has detected some condition that makes a future
FAIL expected?

Let me know if you still want me to test your patch.

Cheers,
Peter



reply via email to

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