On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 02:05:06AM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Sounds like making "make test" build it is a more correct approach,
> > at least to me.  What am I missing?
> How exactly?  I'm not exactly competent in make, but this is what I
> understood from what you said (and it's obviously wrong):
> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> index 03524d0..da91937 100644
> --- a/Makefile
> +++ b/Makefile
> @@ -580,6 +580,7 @@ TEST_PROGRAMS_NEED_X += test-svn-fe
>  TEST_PROGRAMS_NEED_X += test-wildmatch
>  TEST_PROGRAMS = $(patsubst %,%$X,$(TEST_PROGRAMS_NEED_X))
> +TEST_PROGRAMS += git-remote-testpy

I'm confused. git-remote-testpy is already mentioned in SCRIPT_PYTHON,
which means it should be built by "make" or "make all", as well as "make
test" (which depends on "all"). I just double checked that this is the
case with a fresh clone of master. NO_INSTALL should not have an impact.

But upon looking at the Makefile more, I am doubly confused. We build
$(ALL_PROGRAMS), which contains $(SCRIPTS), which contains
$(SCRIPT_PYTHON_INS), the set of _installed_ python scripts. Which
doesn't make sense; we would want to build all of the generated scripts,
and only care about the installed ones for the "install" target.

Ah, I see. We later add back in $(NO_INSTALL) as dependencies of "all".
That is perhaps not the most direct way of doing it, but I suspect it
was done to keep the meaning of "$(ALL_PROGRAMS)" the same before and

So I do not see any problem with the current Makefile. Running "make" or
"make test" should let t5800 pass. Can you describe how you are
triggering the issue in more detail?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to