Re: distcheck and canonical_*

2010-03-03 Thread NightStrike
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_*

2010-03-02 Thread Steffen Dettmer
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_*

2010-03-02 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
* 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_*

2010-03-01 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
* 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_*

2010-02-28 Thread NightStrike
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_*

2010-02-27 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
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