* Eric Blake wrote on Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 09:46:15PM CEST: > Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at> gmx.de> writes: > > > > Yep. It's a timing problem: the `script' from the first test has the > > same time stamp as the `script.as' from the second test, tricking > > autom4te to think that its output is already up to date. > > This begs the question - should we teach autom4te to automatically enable > --force if the output file exists but has a timestamp of now, within the > resolution detected for the filesystem?
Hmm. The question is whether that defeats a very common use case of the caching, namely Makefile-triggered autotools reruns. The next question is whether we should care, or decree that m4 is now fast enough. ;-) But I agree that this is a good post-2.63 question. > > Avoid timestamp races for updated input. > > > > * tests/m4sh.at (AS_IF and AS_CASE): Use `autom4te --force' for > > second script. > > * tests/tools.at (autotools and whitespace in file names): Add > > --force for repeated invocations. > > Go ahead and commit. Done, and set limit back to 1000. Thanks, Ralf
