GNU bug report logs - #26471
Automake 1.15 generates a recheck target that depends on all, breaking parallel builds

Previous Next

Full log

Message #13 received at 26471 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mathieu Lirzin <mthl <at> gnu.org>
To: Seth Fowler <seth.fowler <at> me.com>
Cc: 26471 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#26471: Automake 1.15 generates a recheck target that depends
 on all, breaking parallel builds
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 01:37:00 +0100

Hi Seth,

Mathieu Lirzin <mthl <at> gnu.org> writes:

> Seth Fowler <seth.fowler <at> me.com> writes:
>
>> I recently ran into what appears to be a bug in automake and I thought it would be a good idea to let you know.
>>
>> We had noticed that running “make recheck -j8” if some source files
>> were dirty would cause random build failures. The symptom was that the
>> same file was getting built more than once by different make
>> processes, which led to the resulting objects being corrupted. We’d
>> see messages like this:
>>
>>     libtool:   error: ‘foo.lo’ is not a valid libtool object
>>
>> I dug into this a little and the root cause of the problem seems to be
>> that unlike the other top-level targets generated by automake (check,
>> install, etc.), recheck depends on “all” instead of “all-am”. “all”
>> doesn’t declare very many dependencies - it just launches a new copy
>> of make that builds “all-am”. Because recheck also depends on other
>> targets (e.g. everything in check_PROGRAMS) which might depend on some
>> of the same things as “all-am”, in a parallel build the original make
>> process and the make process spawned by “all” can end up attempting to
>> build the same targets.
>>
>> I fixed this for our project by copying the generated recheck rule
>> into our Makefile.am and replacing “all” with “all-am”. After doing
>> this, I could no longer reproduce the problem with “make recheck -j8”.
>>
>> It seems like that change should be made in automake itself. Or maybe I just missed something - I’m far from an automake guru. =)
>
> Seems like a bug.

Any news?  Would be great if you could provide a way to reproduce this
issue.

Thanks.

-- 
Mathieu Lirzin
GPG: F2A3 8D7E EB2B 6640 5761  070D 0ADE E100 9460 4D37

Previous Next

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