bug#10324: [Platform-testers] Automake 1.11.1b test release

[Peter Rosin]

Stefano Lattarini skrev 2011-12-20 21:30:
> Hi Peter, thanks for the patch.
> 
> On 12/20/2011 09:15 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>
>> How about this for maint? Caution, I'm pretty much ignorant of lex details...
>>
> Surely no more than I am, so I'll follow your lead.  I just have a couple of 
> nits below.

Heh, I wouldn't bet on it. This was a first for me... :-)

>> Cheers,
>> Peter
>>
>> 2011-12-20  Peter Rosin  <address@hidden>
>>
>>      tests: fix spurious failure on systems lacking unistd.h
>>      * tests/silent-lex-generic.test (foo.l): Don't require unistd.h
>>      to be present.
>>
> Here, I'd report the bug number and the name of the affected system as well; 
> something
> like this:
> 
>       tests: fix spurious failure on systems lacking unistd.h
>         This is for automake bug#10324.
>       * tests/silent-lex-generic.test (foo.l): Add a dummy #define of 
> YY_NO_UNISTD_H,
>       so that the generated foo.c file won't require unistd.h to be present 
> (it is
>       not when compiling with, e.g., MSVC 9).
> 
> ACK with this addressed, if you can confirm your change fixes the spurious 
> failure
> (but I bet you've already checked that ;-)

Yes, it fixes the problem and one system which has unistd.h also still passes.

>> diff --git a/tests/silent-lex-generic.test b/tests/silent-lex-generic.test
>> index 2b2183e..a1c19ea 100755
>> --- a/tests/silent-lex-generic.test
>> +++ b/tests/silent-lex-generic.test
>> @@ -53,6 +53,10 @@ LDADD = $(LEXLIB)
>>  EOF
>>  
>>  cat > foo.l <<'EOF'
>> +%{
>> +/* avoid non-ANSI #include of unistd.h */
>> +#define YY_NO_UNISTD_H
>>
> Micro-nit: maybe define this to '1' for clarity & safeness?  (This is not a
> requirement for an ACK though, just a matter of preference).

Done.

>> +%}
>>  %%
>>  "END"   return EOF;
>>  .

So, all nits fixed and pushed.

Cheers,
Peter