Re: Build and test failures with Autoconf 2.70
Karl Berry wrote: > Zack Weinberg wrote: >> They all appear to be cases of autoconf and/or aclocal >> getting run when the test suite does not expect them to be run. I am >> stumped as to why > > In short: because the 2.70 autom4te decided not to update configure. > > I don't know why not, but I have a guess: maybe the new autom4te > ignores everything after AC_OUTPUT. Is that correct? Because that is > where some of these tests are adding a new AC_ macro. [...] > in the successful run with autoconf 2.69, it was the > $AUTOCONF run that updated configure (as one would expect). > > In the failing run with autoconf 2.70, the $AUTOCONF run ends with > the line: autom4te: 'configure' is unchanged > > The failure follows. Thanks, that was the clue I needed. The newer autoconf wasn't ignoring code after AC_OUTPUT, but what it *was* doing was leaving the timestamp on configure untouched when a change in configure.ac did not change the generated code. (As if it were using move-if-change to update configure.) AC_LIBSOURCES doesn't change the generated code, because it does all its work via traces, so those tests all failed. I've fixed this in Autoconf trunk now (revision 07130c3e48d12ec155ac5d7630dc7477b6989940) and will shortly merge it to the 2.70 release branch. With this patch applied, I see no failures in the Automake testsuite on a GNU/Linux system. zw p.s. Sorry for the delay, I forgot I wasn't subscribed to any of the Automake mailing lists. I am now.
Re: Build and test failures with Autoconf 2.70
They all appear to be cases of autoconf and/or aclocal getting run when the test suite does not expect them to be run. I am stumped as to why In short: because the 2.70 autom4te decided not to update configure. I don't know why not, but I have a guess: maybe the new autom4te ignores everything after AC_OUTPUT. Is that correct? Because that is where some of these tests are adding a new AC_ macro. In long: I focused on the libobj-basic test since it was simpler than the distcheck-* tests. That test ends with a common sequence. First append to configure.ac to test an additional case: cat configure.proto - > configure.ac < libobj-basic.sh Description: Binary data a69ok-libobj-basic.log.gz Description: Binary data a70fail-libobj-basic.log.gz Description: Binary data
Re: Build and test failures with Autoconf 2.70
FAIL: t/distcheck-missing-m4.sh FAIL: t/distcheck-outdated-m4.sh FAIL: t/libobj-basic.sh FAIL: t/remake-not-after-make-dist.sh FAIL: t/vala-non-recursive-setup.sh Whoops, I see the vala test is the only one you didn't also get, the rest are duplicates. Sorry for the noise.
Re: Build and test failures with Autoconf 2.70
The attached patch fixes two of the problems: Thanks, I pushed that. There are still four testsuite failures on my dev box, After applying your patch, running make -j12 check against autoconf 2.70, I get those failures and several more (as in your case, they don't appear with 2.69): FAIL: t/distcheck-missing-m4.sh FAIL: t/distcheck-outdated-m4.sh FAIL: t/libobj-basic.sh FAIL: t/remake-not-after-make-dist.sh FAIL: t/vala-non-recursive-setup.sh FAIL: t/distcheck-missing-m4 FAIL: t/distcheck-outdated-m4 FAIL: t/libobj-basic FAIL: t/remake-not-after-make-dist FAIL: t/vala-non-recursive-setup (Perhaps there are new nondeterministic failures with parallel make.) Sigh. I'll investigate when I can, time permitting, but if by chance anyone else is willing to look into it, please do. Thanks, Karl
Re: Build and test failures with Autoconf 2.70
The attached patch fixes two of the problems: Thanks, I pushed that. There are still four testsuite failures on my dev box, After applying your patch, running make -j12 check against autoconf 2.70, I get those failures and several more (as in your case, they don't appear with 2.69): FAIL: t/distcheck-missing-m4.sh FAIL: t/distcheck-outdated-m4.sh FAIL: t/libobj-basic.sh FAIL: t/remake-not-after-make-dist.sh FAIL: t/vala-non-recursive-setup.sh FAIL: t/distcheck-missing-m4 FAIL: t/distcheck-outdated-m4 FAIL: t/libobj-basic FAIL: t/remake-not-after-make-dist FAIL: t/vala-non-recursive-setup (Perhaps there are new nondeterministic failures with parallel make.) Sigh. I'll investigate when I can, time permitting, but if by chance anyone else is willing to look into it, please do. Thanks, Karl
