Re: [PATCH] Automake-git testsuite failures: aclocal9, acloca10, nodef

Peter Breitenlohner mppmu.mpg.de> writes: > ~> touch -r file2 file3; cp -p file2 file4; ls -l --full-time file? > > -rw-r--r-- 1 peb THEORY 6 2009-12-07 14:20:04.460965546 +0100 file1 > > -rw-r--r-- 1 peb THEORY 6 2009-12-07 14:20:04.964956156 +0100 file2 > > -rw-r--r-- 1 peb THEORY 0

sub-second time stamp issues (was: [PATCH] Automake-git testsuite failures: aclocal9, acloca10, nodef)

Hello Peter, thanks for the detailed feedback! * Peter Breitenlohner wrote on Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 03:08:34PM CET: > On Fri, 4 Dec 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > ~> touch -r file2 file3; cp -p file2 file4; ls -l --full-time file? > > -rw-r--r-- 1 peb THEORY 6 2009-12-07 14:20:04.460965546 +

Re: [PATCH] Automake-git testsuite failures: aclocal9, acloca10, nodef

On Fri, 4 Dec 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: One involved tool is perl: perl -e 'use File::stat; print (stat("README")->mtime . "\n");' Hi Ralf, all my tests are for x86_64-linux (however, the utilities are 32Bit ones) on a jfs partition (I think ext2 doesn't have subsecond time stamps). ~>

Re: [PATCH] Automake-git testsuite failures: aclocal9, acloca10, nodef

Ralf Wildenhues wrote: ... > My hypothesis as to what's going on: > > The first configure run causes no sanity sleep second because ls -Lt > makes use of subsecond stamps. The second aclocal produces an > aclocal.m4 file still within the same second as the first configure was > produced. The seco

Re: [PATCH] Automake-git testsuite failures: aclocal9, acloca10, nodef

Thanks for the detailed feedback, Peter. Jim, this is , and I'm a bit out of ideas; see at the very end. * Peter Breitenlohner wrote on Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 01:04:09PM CET: > On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: >

Re: [PATCH] Automake-git testsuite failures: aclocal9, acloca10, nodef

On Fri, 4 Dec 2009, Peter Breitenlohner wrote: On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Which Autoconf version do you use? 2.65 as required for the ObjC++ patch. running with perl-5.10.0. Regards Peter Breitenlohner

Re: [PATCH] Automake-git testsuite failures: aclocal9, acloca10, nodef

On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: We'll deal with each such failure one by one. I would like to find and understand any bugs that might be lurking here, and not paper over them. --- a/tests/aclocal9.test +++ b/tests/aclocal9.test @@ -42,6 +42,8 @@ $AUTOCONF grep macro11 foo grep ma

Re: [PATCH] Automake-git testsuite failures: aclocal9, acloca10, nodef

Hello Peter, thanks for the report and patch. * Peter Breitenlohner wrote on Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 10:44:31AM CET: > as I mentioned a few weeks ago, I get a few FAILs when runnig 'make check' > on the current Automake-git. Looking into the three tests I concluded that > it must be a timing proble

Re: [PATCH] Automake-git testsuite failures: aclocal9, acloca10, nodef

On Tue, 24 Nov 2009, Peter Breitenlohner wrote: as I mentioned a few weeks ago, I get a few FAILs when runnig 'make check' on the current Automake-git. Looking into the three tests I concluded that it must be a timing problem. Running ten times just these three tests I got: aclocal9: 6 FAIL +

[PATCH] Automake-git testsuite failures: aclocal9, acloca10, nodef

Hi Ralf, as I mentioned a few weeks ago, I get a few FAILs when runnig 'make check' on the current Automake-git. Looking into the three tests I concluded that it must be a timing problem. Running ten times just these three tests I got: aclocal9: 6 FAIL + 4 PASS acloca10: 10 FAIL nodef: 8 FAIL