GNU bug report logs - #12198
automake 1.12.3 self-tests failure: t/distcheck-override-infodir

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Peter Rosin <peda <at> lysator.liu.se>
To: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 12198 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, "automake-patches <at> gnu.org" <automake-patches <at> gnu.org>
Subject: bug#12198: [PATCH] tests: fixup: make distcheck-override-infodir pass again
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:49:47 +0200

On 2012-08-14 18:53, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On 08/14/2012 06:44 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> Hi Peter, thanks for the report and the fix.
>>
>> On 08/14/2012 03:25 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>>
>>> Ok to push this fix to maint?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> [Subject] tests: fixup: make distcheck-override-infodir pass again
>>>
>> I'd suggest being a little more precise:
>>
>>   tests: fixup: avoid spurious failure on Cygwin for distcheck-override-infodir
>>
> Forget it, I've seen that the failure is cross-system (reported in automake
> bug#12198).  Your origin summary line was correct, sorry.  However, may I ask
> that, the next time you send the fix for a bug, you CC: the relevant bug
> report (as I'm doing now) and add a reference to the bug number in the commit
> message?  In this case, change it to read:
> 
>     tests: fixup: make distcheck-override-infodir pass again
> 
>     Fixes Automake bug#12198.
> 
>     * t/distcheck-override-infodir.sh (main.texi): Remove all leading
>     cruft added by commit v1.12.2-96-g133307b "maintcheck: fix spurious
>     warnings".
> 

Done, but note that I posted the patch before the bug report arrived in
my mailbox. I'm still causal, so it would have been a neat trick to
include that bug number from the start. :-)

>>> diff --git a/t/distcheck-override-infodir.sh b/t/distcheck-override-infodir.sh
>>> index 74f6c67..eb41a37 100755
>>> --- a/t/distcheck-override-infodir.sh
>>> +++ b/t/distcheck-override-infodir.sh
>>> @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ installcheck-local:
>>>  END
>>>  
>>>  # Protect with leading " # " to avoid spurious maintainer-check failures.
>>> -sed 's/^ #//' > main.texi << 'END'
>>> +sed 's/^ # //' > main.texi << 'END'
>>>
>> I'd say we might be even safer and do 's/^ *# *//'.  OK?
>>
>>>   # \input texinfo
>>>   # @setfilename main.info
>>>   # @settitle main
>>>
>> ACK with those two nits addressed.
>>
> Ditto :-)

Pushed with nits fixed...

Cheers,
Peter

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.