> On 17 Apr 2022, at 05:55, Alex Ameen <alex.ameen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This was all green down the line on the test suite on multiple systems ( 
> don't get too excited yet ) until I found bugs in the testsuite...
> I see how this flew under the radar previously though - currently there are 
> no tests which attempt to check RPATH or RUNPATH entries. I'll definitely be 
> working on that... I'm going to be working out some M4 macros to abstract 
> some functions like `lt_read_pheader([BIN], [ENTRY])', 
> `lt_read_rpath([BIN])', and `lt_read_runpath([BIN])', so that those can be 
> abstracted for handling non-ELF binaries.
> I'll make a test case to the effect of `readelf -d -W BIN|grep -v 
> "$sysroot/";', if you have any additional input on new test cases let me know.
> You also helped me catch some bad regex in the existing sysroot tests that 
> would cause them to never be run on a system which used '/' as their GCC 
> sysroot ( all of dpkg's  cross compilers seem to... ).

Nice! I've found a *lot* of things don't respect this case, actually.

> So a big thank you for helping to catch all of these places that the tool can 
> be improved.
> Naturally now that test cases aren't skipped they're red, so once I sanity 
> check that they fail on the mainline branch I can move forward. I'm ~99% sure 
> this patch will have no effect on those results.

FWIW, given the comments on the main libtool ML, I at least am happy to drop 
this one for now, and revisit later. Richard might feel differently though.

I like incremental progress so the more easy stuff in, the better, even if it 
means we have to come back to some of the harder ones.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Reply via email to