On Sunday 17 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 09:08:54PM CEST: > > On Sunday 17 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > Otherwise you will have spurious failures (and to some extent > > > "arbitrary code execution" upon a testsuite run). > > > > > What about initilizing me from `$am_test_name' then? On the line of: > > That's a little better, but not much.
> In principle, all environment we depend on should have a good reason > we do. We get sporadic bug reports in autotools about all kinds of > variables that we inherit and use, e.g., $U. All such variables need > to be documented, and, as much as possible, sanitized. I simply don't > understand why you need $me adjustable, > See below. > and the name does not imply that Automake's uses it, or what it would > use it for. > Agreed. > am_test_name is better, but doesn't explain either why it would be > needed in the first place. > Second patch of: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake-patches/2011-02/msg00044.html> And possible similar patches in the future. Regards, Stefano
