I've applied the reindenting patch (so far).
Thanks,
Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
config-patches mailing list
config-patches@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/config-patches
Oh OK. Here is another version of the 3rd patch.
Firstly, I realized my own other mistake: I had improperly limited the
*-* patterns in a few case when fixing shellcheck errors. Existing globs
shouldn't be restricted. [I had been narrowly extending the "special
case" rules below to just
There are now two separate tests for config.sub. I would like the test results
tracked separately.
Perhaps it is time to switch to a Dejagnu test harness.
Ben
On 30 July 2018 3:10:46 pm AEST, John Ericson
wrote:
>I made it print either "PASS...\nPASS..." for both successful, or
>nothing
I made it print either "PASS...\nPASS..." for both successful, or
nothing otherwise, which was my best guess for what you meant. I also
added 2 more cleanups of the testsuite go in 2 prior commits.
Cheers,
John
On 07/29/18 21:03, John Ericson wrote:
I'll get to this is a few hours. What do
I'll get to this is a few hours. What do you want it to say if the checks succeed and idempotency checks fail, or vice versa? (Maybe there should be a 3rd line for overall success?)John___
config-patches mailing list
config-patches@gnu.org
Hi John
With your patch, the testsuite output looks like this:
cd testsuite && bash config-guess.sh && rm uname
PASS: config.guess checks (101 tests)
cd testsuite && bash config-sub.sh
Checking mappings...
Checking idempotency...
PASS: config.sub checks (597 tests)
Can you
Glad you like it! Just let me know if there's any way I can assist with
the improvements.
Cheers,
John
On 07/26/18 19:49, Ben Elliston wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:57:27PM -0400, John Ericson wrote:
A canonical form is defined as one that maps to itself. I decided to
check whether
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:57:27PM -0400, John Ericson wrote:
> A canonical form is defined as one that maps to itself. I decided to
> check whether the config.sub test suite's canonical configurations
> actually did, and many of them did not, or weren't even accepted at
> all!
This is a good
