libtool-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] Enable runtime cwrapper debugging; add tests


From: Charles Wilson
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable runtime cwrapper debugging; add tests
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 15:28:49 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090812 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Charles Wilson wrote on Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 06:47:10PM CET:
>> Finally, it's not clear in your message: are you saying that *existing*
>> win32 "changes" currently in master are causing problems on HP-UX, or
>> just that some of the win32 changes /in this patch/ are causing them?
> 
> Something causes lots of leftover shell temp files, and they contain
> cwrapper contents.  These leftover files cause later, unrelated
> processes with same PIDs to fail when needing shell temp files as well
> (yeah the temp file naming is really crappy).  Bet it's merely some
> shell bug with here-documents in functions or so, but I haven't analyzed
> it yet.

Hm. Platforms that are not win32ish should not be emitting the cwrapper
at all.  Brainstorming without actually being able to test on HPUX, it
sounds like libtool/HPUX is creating HERE documents for some /other/
purpose, but skipping past the EOF marker until it finds one it likes,
which happens to be in the middle of the cwrapper.

Does HPUX's shell not like any of these constructs?

cat <<WORD
...stuff...
WORD

cat <<"WORD"
...stuff...
WORD

Maybe it doesn't know that
WORD
matches "WORD" in the second example?  (If that's the case, then that
particular shell is borked and we ought to detect and die...)

> As to Bob's certainly right note on a high bar for patch entry: adding
> more testsuite coverage can only help confidence in changes.  Yes, I am
> repeating myself.  (And no, this isn't particularly directed at your w32
> changes, either.)

I should hope not. One effect of /THIS/ patch is to ADD some tests.

Oh yeah...ping? Is the HPUX problem a blocker for these three patches,
or can they be considered before solving the HPUX issue?

In any case, here's a quick-n-dirty set of test scripts to help narrow
down the problem.  If someone with access to HPUX can unpack and run
't.sh', and report back the results, we might be able to narrow down the
cause of this problem. (Might need to change the shbang lines to use the
same shell that's causing issues with libtool).

--
Chuck

Attachment: heredoc_test_scripts.tar.bz2
Description: Binary data


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]