Re: distcheck and canonical_*
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 1:03 AM, Ralf Wildenhues ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de wrote: * Steffen Dettmer wrote on Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 12:21:32AM CET: On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 2:55 PM, NightStrike wrote: When doing a make distcheck, why is for instance the --host option not propagated to configure without explicitly setting DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS? erm... isn't --host enabling cross-compiling? And when cross-compiling, make check always fails with some cannot execute binary or so, so distcheck would always fail? NightStrike's package is very specialized: by default it will run on 64-bit Windows only, because it's part of the support package for MinGW64 (or so I assume). So, since the package already requires a cross compilation environment, it might as well also require an emulator to be able to execute tests for a successful distcheck. wine comes to mind for this, together with binfmt-support to automatically execute w32 binaries using wine. Correct. And 64-bit Wine actually works pretty well.
Re: distcheck and canonical_*
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 2:55 PM, NightStrike nightstr...@gmail.com wrote: When doing a make distcheck, why is for instance the --host option not propagated to configure without explicitly setting DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS? erm... isn't --host enabling cross-compiling? And when cross-compiling, make check always fails with some cannot execute binary or so, so distcheck would always fail? Or do I miss something? oki, Steffen
Re: distcheck and canonical_*
* Steffen Dettmer wrote on Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 12:21:32AM CET: On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 2:55 PM, NightStrike wrote: When doing a make distcheck, why is for instance the --host option not propagated to configure without explicitly setting DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS? erm... isn't --host enabling cross-compiling? And when cross-compiling, make check always fails with some cannot execute binary or so, so distcheck would always fail? NightStrike's package is very specialized: by default it will run on 64-bit Windows only, because it's part of the support package for MinGW64 (or so I assume). So, since the package already requires a cross compilation environment, it might as well also require an emulator to be able to execute tests for a successful distcheck. wine comes to mind for this, together with binfmt-support to automatically execute w32 binaries using wine. Cheers, Ralf
Re: distcheck and canonical_*
* NightStrike wrote on Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 04:54:57PM CET: On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:39 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: if your package needs some settings for distcheck to work by default, then you can use DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS. Given that our base system is 64-bit windows, and there is no unixy environment for it yet (msys is still 32-bit only), we are pretty much always cross compiling when doing distchecks (usually from linux, as it's fast). So, I wound up just putting --host into the distcheck configure arguments. Hope that's ok. Yes, in your case that sounds like the right approach to me. Cheers, Ralf
Re: distcheck and canonical_*
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:39 PM, Ralf Wildenhues ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de wrote: Hello, * NightStrike wrote on Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 02:55:09PM CET: When doing a make distcheck, why is for instance the --host option not propagated to configure without explicitly setting DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS? The default INSTALL file recommends just running ./configure make make install without further options. The Autoconf manual documents, as basic statement, running ./configure without options. The implicit assumption engraved into autotools is that a plain ./configure works most of the time. As such, distcheck, the test which aims to help ensure that your package is suitable for the average user, should just invoke that plain configure. The way you have set up the package in your developer build tree may have little to with that, be that --host or --enable-maintainer-mode arguments. So yes, the fact that arguments are not propagated from configure to distcheck by default, could be called a feature. Hope that helps. If you need --host by default on your system, I suggest you install on it a config.site file that sets host_alias; if your package needs some settings for distcheck to work by default, then you can use DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS. Cheers, Ralf Given that our base system is 64-bit windows, and there is no unixy environment for it yet (msys is still 32-bit only), we are pretty much always cross compiling when doing distchecks (usually from linux, as it's fast). So, I wound up just putting --host into the distcheck configure arguments. Hope that's ok.
Re: distcheck and canonical_*
Hello, * NightStrike wrote on Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 02:55:09PM CET: When doing a make distcheck, why is for instance the --host option not propagated to configure without explicitly setting DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS? The default INSTALL file recommends just running ./configure make make install without further options. The Autoconf manual documents, as basic statement, running ./configure without options. The implicit assumption engraved into autotools is that a plain ./configure works most of the time. As such, distcheck, the test which aims to help ensure that your package is suitable for the average user, should just invoke that plain configure. The way you have set up the package in your developer build tree may have little to with that, be that --host or --enable-maintainer-mode arguments. So yes, the fact that arguments are not propagated from configure to distcheck by default, could be called a feature. Hope that helps. If you need --host by default on your system, I suggest you install on it a config.site file that sets host_alias; if your package needs some settings for distcheck to work by default, then you can use DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS. Cheers, Ralf
