Re: [PATCH] Make badopt.test stricter (by enabling `set -e').

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:04:51AM CEST: > Another simple patch aimed at making the Automake test scripts use > `set -e' more consistently. Can we merge this patch with all others that are still to come and set -e on tests? Thanks, Ralf

[PATCH] Make badopt.test stricter (by enabling `set -e').

Another simple patch aimed at making the Automake test scripts use `set -e' more consistently. -*-*- Make badopt.test stricter (by enabling `set -e'). * tests/badopt.test: Add call to `set -e'. Due to this change, an unexpected failure in the call to `$ACLOCAL' (whose outcome was previously u

Re: Some warnings of type `unsupported' don't cause "automake -Werror" to fail

At Tuesday 20 April 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > AFAICS, your test doesn't ensure that without -Werror turned on, > automake actually suceeds when both configure.ac and configure.in > are present. *Blush*. You're right. Bad overlooking. > OTOH, actually ensuring that configure.ac is used see

Re: pending patches (was: [PATCH 2/2] Bugfix in confh5.test w.r.t. Solaris/Heirloom Sh.)

At Tuesday 20 April 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > > In fact, I'm assuming that you haven't > > answered the the recent still-pending patches' proposals > > basically for lack of time; > > Right. Those where I've merged your patches looked all fine to me. > Sorry if that looked

Re: Some warnings of type `unsupported' don't cause "automake -Werror" to fail

[ let's drop bug-automake ] * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:55:36PM CEST: > At Tuesday 20 April 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > > I'm applying this fix. > > ... > > * tests/configure.test: New test. > > ... > OK, I'm a dope... I found the bug while trying to write

Re: Use `set -e' in confsub.test (avoid false negatives).

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:22:48PM CEST: > Mmhh... I thought that you had already applied this patch, but > perusing the git logs of latest master I saw that this is not the > case. > > Thus I rebased the patches and amended them to follow your > suggestions. The new p

pending patches (was: [PATCH 2/2] Bugfix in confh5.test w.r.t. Solaris/Heirloom Sh.)

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:14:51PM CEST: > At Tuesday 20 April 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Thanks. This and newer patches of yours should all be applied now. > > Please speak up if I've overlooked any again. > I guess that you're talking about overlooked

Re: Some warnings of type `unsupported' don't cause "automake -Werror" to fail

At Tuesday 20 April 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > I'm applying this fix. > ... > * tests/configure.test: New test. > ... OK, I'm a dope... I found the bug while trying to write a test script for the copresence of configure.{in,ac}, but then I didn't include that script in the bug r

Use `set -e' in confsub.test (avoid false negatives).

Mmhh... I thought that you had already applied this patch, but perusing the git logs of latest master I saw that this is not the case. Thus I rebased the patches and amended them to follow your suggestions. The new patches are attached. Regards, Stefano -*-*- PATCH [1/2] Use `set -e' in

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Bugfix in confh5.test w.r.t. Solaris/Heirloom Sh.

At Tuesday 20 April 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 03:56:05PM CEST: > > At Sunday 11 April 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 05:11:44PM CEST: > > > > * tests/confh5.test: In the generated Makefil