Re: fix test failure in test-u8-strtok

Bruno Haible writes: > But the unit test expects a libunistring of version 0.9.6 or newer > (since that was the version in which the fix was delivered). > > This proposed patch fixes the issue for me, along the lines of the comment > in m4/libunistring-base.m4. OK to push?

Re: install-sh and $RANDOM

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 06:24:03AM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > On 10/17/2016 11:46 PM, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 04:56:05PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > >> Second, your claim that things are "spuriously bad if $RANDOM does not > >> exist" is false. Look at the full context: >

Re: install-sh and $RANDOM

On 10/17/2016 11:46 PM, co...@sdf.org wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 04:56:05PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: >> Second, your claim that things are "spuriously bad if $RANDOM does not >> exist" is false. Look at the full context: >> >> tmpdir=${TMPDIR-/tmp}/ins$RANDOM-$$ >>

Re: fix test failure in test-u8-strtok

Daiki Ueno wrote: > > This proposed patch fixes the issue for me, along the lines of the comment > > in m4/libunistring-base.m4. OK to push? > > Sure, thank you for pointing that. OK. Pushed.

Re: getprogname: comments and test failure on Cygwin

Hello, Jim Meyering writes: > On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 5:15 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote: >> On 16/10/16 12:55, Bruno Haible wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> The 'getprogname' module test fails on Cygwin 2.6, because the returned >>> value is "test-getprogname", not

Re: quotearg test failures

Hi Pádraig, > > I disagree with the removal of the '%' checks in tests/test-sh-quote.c > > Agreed. There is a disparity now because there is a switch > from a longer (shell) to a more concise (c) quoting style > in certain cases (when just a single quote is encountered). And what happens more

getprogname and libtool

Daiki Ueno wrote: > On a related note, this new test also fails when it is invoked as a > libtool wrapper script, because of the "lt-" prefix. > > $ ./gnulib-tool --create-testdir --dir t --libtool getprogname > $ cd t && ./configure > $ sed -i 's/^noinst_LTLIBRARIES +=/lib_LTLIBRARIES =/'

Re: quotearg test failures

Bruno Haible wrote: > I disagree with the removal of the '%' checks in tests/test-sh-quote.c Agreed. There is a disparity now because there is a switch from a longer (shell) to a more concise (c) quoting style in certain cases (when just a single quote is encountered). This is fine for most

Re: getprogname: comments and test failure on Cygwin

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 6:07 AM, Daiki Ueno wrote: > Hello, > > Jim Meyering writes: > >> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 5:15 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote: >>> On 16/10/16 12:55, Bruno Haible wrote: Hi, The 'getprogname' module test fails

Re: getprogname and libtool

Bruno Haible writes: > The consequence is that in packages that use GNU libtool, such programs will > print "lt-prog" instead of "prog" in their usage message and other messages. > This will disturb > * the hacker who uses the programs before doing "make install", > * the

Re: getprogname and libtool

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Daiki Ueno wrote: > Bruno Haible writes: > >> The consequence is that in packages that use GNU libtool, such programs will >> print "lt-prog" instead of "prog" in their usage message and other messages. >> This will disturb >> *

Re: quotearg test failures

On 10/18/2016 05:15 AM, Bruno Haible wrote: > > How about this? You are doing multiple passes through the argument string > anyway now. (Originally quotearg was meant as a single-pass implementation, > but it isn't any more.) So > - remove the code block of lines 711..720, > - instead, before

Re: getprogname and libtool

Daiki Ueno wrote: > > The consequence is that in packages that use GNU libtool, such programs will > > print "lt-prog" instead of "prog" in their usage message and other messages. > > This will disturb > > * the hacker who uses the programs before doing "make install", > > * the test suite. >

Re: getprogname and libtool

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: > Daiki Ueno wrote: >> > The consequence is that in packages that use GNU libtool, such programs >> > will >> > print "lt-prog" instead of "prog" in their usage message and other >> > messages. >> > This will disturb >> > *

Re: getprogname: comments and test failure on Cygwin

Padraig Brady and Jim Meyering wrote: > > All improvements look good to me. > > Likewise. OK, I pushed it.

Re: getprogname and libtool

Jim Meyering wrote: > > + if (strncmp (p, "lt-", 3) == 0) > > +p = p + 3; > > Thank you. > You are welcome to push that, even though I prefer the more concise "p += 3;" Thanks for the review. Pushed with your suggested edit. Bruno

Re: getprogname and libtool

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: > Hi Jim, ... > 2016-10-18 Bruno Haible > > getprogname tests: Avoid failure in packages that use libtool. > * tests/test-getprogname.c (main): Strip "lt-" prefix. > Based on a patch

Re: quotearg test failures

Hi Padraig, > In the attached I added a single extra orig_buffersize variable to > control an extra read-only scan. Thanks, it looks good. The other recursive call to quotearg_buffer_restyled return quotearg_buffer_restyled (buffer, buffersize, arg, argsize,

Re: getprogname and libtool

Hi Jim, > > In summary, I like Pino's 'getprogname' module because it nicely solves the > > problems he listed in > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2016-03/msg00048.html. > > > > But I disagree with the idea that the 'program_name' module and the > > set_program_name() function