Opened 19 years ago

Closed 18 years ago

#1597 closed defect (fixed)

module-init-tools testsuite

Reported by: gschafer@… Owned by: Matthew Burgess
Priority: normal Milestone: 6.1.1
Component: Book Version: SVN
Severity: normal Keywords:
Cc:

Description

Please see the url for details.

It should become a non-issue upon the next release of module-init-tools.. but until then the issue needs addressing.

Attachments (1)

module-init-tools-run_testsuite.diff (1013 bytes ) - added by randy@… 19 years ago.
Adds instructions to optionally run the test suite

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (10)

comment:1 by Matthew Burgess, 19 years ago

Uggh, I'd like to punt and just have the book say: "This package doesn't come with a testsuite" to save us having to explain 2 different sets of instructions dependent on whether the user wants to run the tests or not. Does anyone know if the executables are similarly badly affected in recent pre-releases of module-init-tools?

by randy@…, 19 years ago

Adds instructions to optionally run the test suite

comment:2 by tushar@…, 18 years ago

IMO, this bug should be fixed for 6.1.1 since the current command sequence cause problems for folks who run the testsuites.

comment:3 by Matthew Burgess, 18 years ago

(In reply to comment #3)

IMO, this bug should be fixed for 6.1.1 since the current command sequence cause problems for folks who run the testsuites.

I still don't understand what is meant by "Additionally, running make check messes up the built executables" (quoted from the referenced email). Regardless, I think the easiest solution for the branch is to say that this package doesn't come with a testsuite (as it doesn't, technically). We can fix it properly on trunk when the next version of the package comes out. Does that sound reasonable, or am I being too conservative?

The alternative, of course, is to mention where to grab the testsuite tarball from, provide the new instructions, along with a decent explanation of why the `make distclean' is required (i.e. answering the "what does 'messes up the built executables' mean?" question above.

Finally, I don't like the fact that, if we were to use the commands as given in the referenced email, we'd end up running the testsuite on executables built differently to those that will be finally installed on the system. I'm therefore proposing that if the testsuite does get added to the book we use the following recipe:

./configure --prefix="" --enable-zlib && make check && make distclean && ./configure --prefix="" --enable-zlib && make && make install

comment:4 by tushar@…, 18 years ago

If you unpack the testsuite tarball and run make check, it runs configure stage twice. The best way to understand the problem is to try the commands in the book with the make check.

Randy's patch is a good one.

comment:5 by Matthew Burgess, 18 years ago

Milestone: 6.1.1
Owner: changed from lfs-book@… to Matthew Burgess
Priority: lowestnormal

comment:6 by Matthew Burgess, 18 years ago

Status: newassigned

comment:7 by Matthew Burgess, 18 years ago

Fixed in trunk in r7118. Could someone review it for typos, etc. then I'll merge to 6.1.1 and close this one out. Sorry to everyone involved for taking so long to deal with this one!

comment:8 by manuel@…, 18 years ago

For consistency with other optional packages (glic-linuxthreads and bash-doc) and to make more easy the fix needed in jhalfs to can handle that (altought that is secondary and not a requisite), the command to unpack the test-suite package should be added, IMHO.

comment:9 by Matthew Burgess, 18 years ago

Resolution: fixed
Status: assignedclosed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.