[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs |
Date: |
Sun, 19 Sep 2010 20:58:04 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2010-08-04) |
* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 08:45:08PM CEST:
> On Sun, 19 Sep 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 05:45:45PM CEST:
> >>Unfortunately, my MinGW testing is not so successful. The testing
> >>still quits part-way through with some sort of make-related issue
> >>(as reported in detail previously).
> >
> >I don't have that previous report on my radar. Can you point us to it,
> >please?
>
> This is the situation where the tests quit mid-way like this:
>
> PASS: tests/depdemo-shared-unst.test
> make[4]: *** No rule to make target `.log', needed by `test-suite.log'. Stop.
> make[4]: Leaving directory `/home/bfriesen/mingw/libtool-head'
> make[3]: *** [check-TESTS] Error 2
> make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/bfriesen/mingw/libtool-head'
> make[2]: *** [check-am] Error 2
> make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/bfriesen/mingw/libtool-head'
> make[1]: *** [check-recursive] Error 1
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/bfriesen/mingw/libtool-head'
> make: *** [check] Error 2
>
> I am not finding this posted to a libtool list so it was probabably
> in off-list discussion among libtool core developers.
>
> The above is produced today after re-installing MinGW/GCC using the
> latest TDM GCC installer (with GCC 4.5.1). It is similar to what I
> observed before. The test suite used to work so I assume that the
> issue is due to some change in the past few months, such as in
> Automake.
Yeah, this is a GNU make 3.80 bug exposed by Automake 1.11, fixed by
Automake 1.11.1, and re-exposed in git Automake (I am working on a fix
that tries to avoid this and another bug about long $(TESTS) on MinGW).
We /could/ work around it in Libtool by making sure the last entry in
$(TESTS) is non-optional. OTOH, since the release will be done with
Automake 1.11.1, I don't see why we would need to do that.
Thanks for the feedback,
Ralf
- Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, (continued)
- Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Charles Wilson, 2010/09/21
- Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/09/22
- Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Peter Rosin, 2010/09/23
- autobuild results (was: 2.4 Release in 24hrs), Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/09/23
- Re: autobuild results, Peter Rosin, 2010/09/23
- Re: autobuild results, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/09/24
- Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/09/19
- Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Bob Friesenhahn, 2010/09/19
- Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Bob Friesenhahn, 2010/09/19
- Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/09/19
- Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Bob Friesenhahn, 2010/09/19
- Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Charles Wilson, 2010/09/19
Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Peter Rosin, 2010/09/19
Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Eric Blake, 2010/09/20
Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Peter Rosin, 2010/09/21
Re: 2.4 Release in 24hrs, Charles Wilson, 2010/09/21