Re: gc.m4 and hard failure

[Simon Josefsson]

Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> writes:

> It would be great if the gc.m4 module could be taught not to fail when
> no random devices exist (as seen on hppa2.0-hp-hpux10.20).  Passing
>
>   --disable-random-device --disable-pseudo-random-device \
>   --disable-nonce-device
>
> did not help.  libgcrypt was not installed either.
>
> This would help automated testing of gnulib mega test; faking a cross
> compile helps but is so different as to be an actually different test.
>
>
> More generally, I think it would be good if all Gnulib modules allowed
> at least some way of invocation that allowed configure to continue even
> if the tested resources are not present; an extra RUN-IF-FAIL argument
> (possibly defaulting to AC_MSG_ERROR or so) could serve well, for
> example.

I agree.  The functions using those random devices can return an
error, so I suggest turning the errors into warnings, and make the
code properly return an error if the device is unavailable.  I think
the code already does this though.