On Saturday 06 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 05:52:57PM CET: > > Hi Ralf, I've just spotted a bug in the patch ... > > > > - $output_rules .= "\$(srcdir)/$headerfile: > > > \$(srcdir)/${derived}_vala.stamp\n". > > > - "\...@if test -f \$@; then :; else \\\n". > > > - "\t rm -f \$(srcdir)/${derived}_vala.stamp; \\\n". > > > - "\t \$(am__cd) \$(srcdir) && \$(MAKE) \$(AM_MAKEFLAGS) > > > ${derived}_vala.stamp; \\\n". > > > - "\tfi\n"; > > > + $output_rules .= "\$(srcdir)/$headerfile: > > > \$(srcdir)/${derived}_vala.stamp\n" > > > + . "\...@if test -f \$@; then :; else rm -f > > > \$(srcdir)/${derived}_vala.stamp; \n" > > ... here (missing "fi"). It causes a failure in `vala2.test'. > > > > I'll install a fix later if you don't beat me (right now I'm doing other > > testing, and prefer not to be sidetracked by this issue). > > That's what I get for forgetting one testsuite addition. Thanks for > tracking this down, and please push the fix, ideally together with a > new test Is a new test really needed? After all, I noticed the bug because it broke the pre-existing `vala2.test'...
Regards, Stefano