Re: Test failure for popt 1.16
Actually the previous patch is bogus. Right idea, just
the wrong way to fix.
Try this patch instead:
Index: popthelp.c
===
RCS file: /v/rpm/cvs/popt/popthelp.c,v
retrieving revision 1.94
diff -p -u -w -r1.94 popthelp.c
--- popthelp.c 28 Aug 2009 00:06:33 - 1.94
+++ popthelp.c 11 May 2010 19:12:28 -
@@ -652,6 +652,8 @@ static size_t showHelpIntro(poptContext
const char * fn = (os->argv ? os->argv[0] : NULL);
if (fn == NULL) return len;
if (strchr(fn, '/')) fn = strrchr(fn, '/') + 1;
+ if (fn[0] == 'l' && fn[1] == 't' && fn[2] == '-')
+ fn += sizeof("lt-") - 1;
/* XXX POPT_fprintf not needed for argv[0] display. */
fprintf(fp, " %s", fn);
len += strlen(fn) + 1;
Index: testit.sh
===
RCS file: /v/rpm/cvs/popt/testit.sh,v
retrieving revision 1.31
diff -p -u -w -r1.31 testit.sh
--- testit.sh 26 Jul 2009 16:25:23 - 1.31
+++ testit.sh 11 May 2010 19:12:29 -
@@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ run test1 "test1 - 56" "arg1: 0 arg2: (n
run test1 "test1 - 57" "arg1: 0 arg2: (none) aBits: foo,baz" --bits
foo,bar,baz,!bar
run test1 "test1 - 58" "\
-Usage: lt-test1 [-I?] [-c|--cb2=STRING] [--arg1] [-2|--arg2=ARG]
+Usage: test1 [-I?] [-c|--cb2=STRING] [--arg1] [-2|--arg2=ARG]
[-3|--arg3=ANARG] [-onedash] [--optional=STRING] [--val]
[-i|--int=INT] [-s|--short=SHORT] [-l|--long=LONG]
[-L|--longlong=LONGLONG] [-f|--float=FLOAT] [-d|--double=DOUBLE]
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ Usage: lt-test1 [-I?] [-c|--cb2=STRING]
[--bitxor] [--nstr=STRING] [--lstr=STRING] [-I|--inc]
[-c|--cb=STRING] [--longopt] [-?|--help] [--usage] [--simple=ARG]"
--usage
run test1 "test1 - 59" "\
-Usage: lt-test1 [OPTION...]
+Usage: test1 [OPTION...]
--arg1 First argument with a really long
description. After all, we have to test
argument help wrapping somehow, right?
And if you can confirm the patch "works" in the next 24 hours,
I'll re-roll the (unannounced) popt-1.16.tar.gz.
Otherwise, I'll figger better for popt-1.17.
hth
73 de Jeff
On May 11, 2010, at 2:54 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote:
>
> On May 10, 2010, at 7:57 PM, Pieter Bowman wrote:
>
>> I did builds of popt 1.16 on a number of our systems here. Test 59
>> failed on a number of the systems with the following output:
>>
>
> The "fix" for the failure in popt-1.16 "make check" is likely (I have
> easy no easy means of testing across all the platforms that you have)
> as simple as the atached patch.
>
> If you can confirm that the patch "works", I'll re-roll the popt-1.16
> tarballs, and re-release (it hasn't been announced anywhere)
> the popt-1.16 tarball.
>
> hth
>
> 73 de Jeff
> ==
> Index: test1.c
> ===
> RCS file: /v/rpm/cvs/popt/test1.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.44
> diff -p -u -w -r1.44 test1.c
> --- test1.c 26 Jul 2009 16:38:25 - 1.44
> +++ test1.c 11 May 2010 18:50:39 -
> @@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ int main(int argc, const char ** argv)
> resetVars();
> /*...@=modobserver@*/
> /*...@-temptrans@*/
> -optCon = poptGetContext("test1", argc, argv, options, 0);
> +optCon = poptGetContext("test1", argc, argv, options,
> POPT_CONTEXT_KEEP_FIRST);
> /*...@=temptrans@*/
> (void) poptReadConfigFile(optCon, "./test-poptrc");
> (void) poptReadDefaultConfig(optCon, 1);
>
>
> __
> POPT Library http://rpm5.org
> Developer Communication List popt-devel@rpm5.org
__
POPT Library http://rpm5.org
Developer Communication List popt-devel@rpm5.org
Re: Test failure for popt 1.16
On May 10, 2010, at 7:57 PM, Pieter Bowman wrote:
> I did builds of popt 1.16 on a number of our systems here. Test 59
> failed on a number of the systems with the following output:
>
The "fix" for the failure in popt-1.16 "make check" is likely (I have
easy no easy means of testing across all the platforms that you have)
as simple as the atached patch.
If you can confirm that the patch "works", I'll re-roll the popt-1.16
tarballs, and re-release (it hasn't been announced anywhere)
the popt-1.16 tarball.
hth
73 de Jeff
==
Index: test1.c
===
RCS file: /v/rpm/cvs/popt/test1.c,v
retrieving revision 1.44
diff -p -u -w -r1.44 test1.c
--- test1.c 26 Jul 2009 16:38:25 - 1.44
+++ test1.c 11 May 2010 18:50:39 -
@@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ int main(int argc, const char ** argv)
resetVars();
/*...@=modobserver@*/
/*...@-temptrans@*/
-optCon = poptGetContext("test1", argc, argv, options, 0);
+optCon = poptGetContext("test1", argc, argv, options,
POPT_CONTEXT_KEEP_FIRST);
/*...@=temptrans@*/
(void) poptReadConfigFile(optCon, "./test-poptrc");
(void) poptReadDefaultConfig(optCon, 1);
__
POPT Library http://rpm5.org
Developer Communication List popt-devel@rpm5.org
Re: Test failure for popt 1.16
This is largely a cosmetic issue introduced by using libtool (i.e. "test1" != "lt-test1"in argv[0]). But yes, could/should be fixed. 73 de Jeff On May 10, 2010, at 7:57 PM, Pieter Bowman wrote: > I did builds of popt 1.16 on a number of our systems here. Test 59 > failed on a number of the systems with the following output: > > Test "test1 --usage" failed with: "Usage: test1 [-I?] [-c|--cb2=STRING] > [--arg1] [-2|--arg2=ARG] >[-3|--arg3=ANARG] [-onedash] [--optional=STRING] [--val] >[-i|--int=INT] [-s|--short=SHORT] [-l|--long=LONG] >[-L|--longlong=LONGLONG] [-f|--float=FLOAT] [-d|--double=DOUBLE] >[--randint=INT] [--randshort=SHORT] [--randlong=LONG] >[--randlonglong=LONGLONG] [--argv=STRING] [--bitset] [--bitclr] >[--bitxor] [--nstr=STRING] [--lstr=STRING] [-I|--inc] >[-c|--cb=STRING] [--longopt] [-?|--help] [--usage] [--simple=ARG]" != > "Usage: lt-test1 [-I?] [-c|--cb2=STRING] [--arg1] [-2|--arg2=ARG] >[-3|--arg3=ANARG] [-onedash] [--optional=STRING] [--val] >[-i|--int=INT] [-s|--short=SHORT] [-l|--long=LONG] >[-L|--longlong=LONGLONG] [-f|--float=FLOAT] [-d|--double=DOUBLE] >[--randint=INT] [--randshort=SHORT] [--randlong=LONG] >[--randlonglong=LONGLONG] [--argv=STRING] [--bitset] [--bitclr] >[--bitxor] [--nstr=STRING] [--lstr=STRING] [-I|--inc] >[-c|--cb=STRING] [--longopt] [-?|--help] [--usage] [--simple=ARG]" > > The operating systems which failed were: > > gentoo/Linux, Alpha, PowerPC, PowerPC64, SPARC > MacOS X 10.5, PowerPC, Intel > FreeBSD 8, x86 > MirOS (aka. MirBSD), x86 > NetBSD 5.0.2, x86 > OpenBSD 4.7, x86 > OpenSolaris snv_134 X86 > OpenSUSE 11.2, x86_64 > Solaris 10 x86, x86_64, SPARC > > The operating systems which succeeded were: > > RedHat Enterprise Linux 5.5, x86, x86_64, IA64 > Ubuntu 9.10, x86 > Fedora 12, x86 > > Thanks for looking into this. > > Pieter > __ > POPT Library http://rpm5.org > Developer Communication List popt-devel@rpm5.org __ POPT Library http://rpm5.org Developer Communication List popt-devel@rpm5.org
Test failure for popt 1.16
I did builds of popt 1.16 on a number of our systems here. Test 59 failed on a number of the systems with the following output: Test "test1 --usage" failed with: "Usage: test1 [-I?] [-c|--cb2=STRING] [--arg1] [-2|--arg2=ARG] [-3|--arg3=ANARG] [-onedash] [--optional=STRING] [--val] [-i|--int=INT] [-s|--short=SHORT] [-l|--long=LONG] [-L|--longlong=LONGLONG] [-f|--float=FLOAT] [-d|--double=DOUBLE] [--randint=INT] [--randshort=SHORT] [--randlong=LONG] [--randlonglong=LONGLONG] [--argv=STRING] [--bitset] [--bitclr] [--bitxor] [--nstr=STRING] [--lstr=STRING] [-I|--inc] [-c|--cb=STRING] [--longopt] [-?|--help] [--usage] [--simple=ARG]" != "Usage: lt-test1 [-I?] [-c|--cb2=STRING] [--arg1] [-2|--arg2=ARG] [-3|--arg3=ANARG] [-onedash] [--optional=STRING] [--val] [-i|--int=INT] [-s|--short=SHORT] [-l|--long=LONG] [-L|--longlong=LONGLONG] [-f|--float=FLOAT] [-d|--double=DOUBLE] [--randint=INT] [--randshort=SHORT] [--randlong=LONG] [--randlonglong=LONGLONG] [--argv=STRING] [--bitset] [--bitclr] [--bitxor] [--nstr=STRING] [--lstr=STRING] [-I|--inc] [-c|--cb=STRING] [--longopt] [-?|--help] [--usage] [--simple=ARG]" The operating systems which failed were: gentoo/Linux, Alpha, PowerPC, PowerPC64, SPARC MacOS X 10.5, PowerPC, Intel FreeBSD 8, x86 MirOS (aka. MirBSD), x86 NetBSD 5.0.2, x86 OpenBSD 4.7, x86 OpenSolaris snv_134 X86 OpenSUSE 11.2, x86_64 Solaris 10 x86, x86_64, SPARC The operating systems which succeeded were: RedHat Enterprise Linux 5.5, x86, x86_64, IA64 Ubuntu 9.10, x86 Fedora 12, x86 Thanks for looking into this. Pieter __ POPT Library http://rpm5.org Developer Communication List popt-devel@rpm5.org
