On Tue, 2022-10-25 at 22:13 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > So if we see a difference it must be that there's some OTHER
> > difference not just CRLF. Or, the test suite comparison has a
> > bug. I'll have to look more closely at the output.
>
> I do see differences unrelated to CRLF, see
> From: Paul Smith
> Cc: br...@clisp.org, bug-make@gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 14:10:25 -0400
>
> On Tue, 2022-10-25 at 19:37 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > A lot of these seem to be CRLF errors in the diff, where it would
> > > otherwise match. I know that the test framework does some
I'd think it would be easy to write a diff script in Perl to avoid platform
dependencies. In fact the result would be simpler than Paul describes
because instead of actually modifying logfiles the mods could be done
in-memory by the script. Reading in two text files, strinpping off
newlines,
On Tue, 2022-10-25 at 19:37 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > A lot of these seem to be CRLF errors in the diff, where it would
> > otherwise match. I know that the test framework does some
> > manipulation of CRLF.
>
> If the test suite runs Diff, it should invoke it with the
>
> From: Paul Smith
> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 12:07:08 -0400
>
> On Tue, 2022-10-25 at 16:29 +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
> > With GNU make 4.3.92, this is down to 75 test failures.
>
> Just curious how this MinGW test works; are you running the MinGW
> "cross-compiler" installed by the Cygwin
On Tue, 2022-10-25 at 16:29 +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
> With GNU make 4.3.92, this is down to 75 test failures.
Just curious how this MinGW test works; are you running the MinGW
"cross-compiler" installed by the Cygwin package manager, and doing the
build/test from within a Cygwin shell?
A lot
I wrote:
> On mingw (on Windows 10 in a Cygwin dev environment), compilation works
> fine, but there are 91 test failures.
With GNU make 4.3.92, this is down to 75 test failures.
makeerror-x86_64-w64-mingw.tar.gz
Description: application/compressed-tar
