Re: rhel8 test failure confirmation?
Bogdan <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.sysutils.automake.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Jacob Bachmeyer <[email protected]>, Mon Apr 03 2023 06:16:53 GMT+0200 (Central European Summer Time) > Karl Berry wrote: >> [...] >> What can we do about this? >> >> As for automake: can we (you :) somehow modify the computation of the >> sleep value to determine if autom4te can handle the HiRes testing or >> not >> (i.e., has the patch installed)? And then use the longer sleep in >> automake testing if needed. > > If you can locate Autom4te::FileUtils, grepping it for "Time::HiRes" > will tell you if autom4te supports sub-second timestamps, but then you > need more checks to validate that the filesystem actually has > sub-second timestamps. > > A simple check: > > if $PERL -I${autom4te_perllibdir:-/usr/share/autoconf} > -I/usr/local/share/autoconf \ > -MAutom4te::FileUtils -e 'exit defined $INC{q[Time/HiRes.pm]} > ? 0 : 1'; then > # autom4te uses Time::HiRes > else > # autom4te does not use Time::HiRes > fi > > This method also has the advantage of implicitly also checking that > $PERL has Time::HiRes installed by determining if loading > Autom4te::FileUtils causes Time::HiRes to be loaded. (In other words, > this will give the correct answer on Perl 5.6 if Time::HiRes was > installed from CPAN or on later Perls if a distribution packager has > unbundled Time::HiRes and the user has not installed its package.) Nice. The 0 and 1 may not be portable to each OS in the Universe (see EXIT_SUCCESS and EXIT_FAILURE in exit(3)), but should be good/portable enough for our goals. Or maybe some other simple solution. As I understand, this could even be used to actually call the sub which checks the timestamps, so we'd have a read-to-use test. Only a matter of where to put it... Is there some code that runs *before* all tests that could set some environment variable passed to the tests, create a file, or whatever? >> [...] >> It seems to me that using autoconf -f or similar is papering over the >> problem, so that the tests are no longer testing the normal behavior. >> Which does not sound desirable. > > The Automake testsuite is supposed to test Automake, not Autoconf, so > working around Autoconf issues is appropriate. I agree with this one, too. Don't do workarounds in tests to fix Automake issues, just fix the issue in Automake :). But workarounds, conditional code, skipping tests, etc. are allowed when using other tools in Automake tests. > In this case, if > always using "autoconf -f" allows us to eliminate the sleeps entirely > (and does not expand the running time of Autoconf too much), we should > do that, at least in my view. Yes, that could be the simplest. I (or someone) just need to find out how to time individual tests (or maybe I'll just run 'time make check TESTS=...') and do the actual measurements :). I was hoping to have more time for this, but unfortunately, I got busy with other things and this may have to wait a bit. Maybe this week, maybe the next... -- Regards - Bogdan ('bogdro') D. (GNU/Linux & FreeDOS) X86 assembly (DOS, GNU/Linux): http://bogdro.evai.pl/index-en.php Soft(EN): http://bogdro.evai.pl/soft http://bogdro.evai.pl/soft4asm www.Xiph.org www.TorProject.org www.LibreOffice.org www.GnuPG.org