RE: Smoke machines doing make regen_headers

[email protected] ("Arthur Bergman")
Newsgroups perl.daily-build
Message-ID <016c01c12f81$d2fbf9a0$052aa8c0@foo>
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 10:53:22PM +0200, Arthur Bergman wrote:
> > I would suggest that smoke scripts all do make regen_headers before smoking not to report trivial header file mixups. Or because you got a snapshot inbetween a patch and a make regen_header submit to the repository.
> 
> Aren't the targets in the Makefile supposed to ensure that headers get
> regenerated in the case where they are out of date w.r.t. the scripts that
> generate them?

That might be the case, but we still need to do a make regen_headers and submit these into the source repository. And taken from the emails it doesn't seem to do that for people.

> [I seem to remember adding an extra un-needed dependency to one to con gnu
> make into running one of the regen scripts before another, so that it
> the date stamps ended up in "order" so that make didn't end up re-running
> one of the regen scripts next make and consequentially completely rebuilding
> everything.
> 
> ie if a regen headers was necessary
> 
> make
> make test
> 
> would re-make some headers on make test, and then make all the object files
> again. This con cured the remake.
> 
> Sorry for this digression]
> 
> If the current dependencies can't always detect the need to make
> regen_headers, can we fix them rather than working round it in the smoke
> test?

Indeed that would be a good solution. However I can see potential problems with the dates getting mixedup on downloads.

I still would like to smoke script to a make regen_headers; make; make test; since catching the fact that the headers haven't been checked into p4 isn't realy what smokers are for.

> Nicholas Clark
> 
Arthur
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.