Re: rhel8 test failure confirmation?

On Sat, Dec 2, 2023, at 7:33 PM, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
> Zack Weinberg wrote:
>> Would it help if we added a command line option to autom4te that made
>> it report whether it thought it could use high resolution timestamps?
>> Versions of autom4te that didn't recognize this option should be
>> conservatively assumed not to support them.
>
> Why not just add that information to the --version message?  Add a
> "(HiRes)" tag somewhere if Time::HiRes is available?

Either way is no problem from my end, but it would be more work
for automake (parsing --version output, instead of just checking the
exit status of autom4te --assert-high-resolution-timestamp-support)
Karl, do you have a preference here?  I can make whatever you decide
on happen, in the next couple of days.

>> (Of course there's the additional wrinkle that whether high
>> resolution timestamps *work* depends on what filesystem
>> autom4te.cache is stored in
>
> Is this actually still a problem (other than for ensuring the cache is
> used in the testsuite)

I don't *think* so but I don't understand the problem 100% so I
could be missing something.

zw