bug#26033: EXEEXT not exported to tests

[Mathieu Lirzin]

severity 26033 wishlist
tag 26033 wontfix
close 26033
thanks

Hello Peter,

address@hidden (Peter Selinger) writes:

> =?UTF-8?Q?Hans-Bernhard_Br=c3=b6ker?= wrote:
>> 
>> Am 08.03.2017 um 20:52 schrieb Peter Selinger:
>> 
>> > The tests require this information, for
>> > example when they are shell scripts starting up executable programs
>> > to be tested.
>> 
>> Not really.  On the platforms where EXEEXT is non-empty, scripts do 
>> _not_ need to know about it to start executables, i.e.
>> 
>> Trying to test the behaviour of $(EXEEXT) on platforms where it's 
>> normally empty is, IMHO, futile.  This isn't an autoconf test whose 
>> result one should ever override.
>> 
>> > Although the test script
>> > check/mytest2.sh specified ../src/someprogram$EXEEXT, the EXEEXT
>> > setting was not exported to the script.
>> 
>> You don't need $(EXEEXT) to run the executable --- only to check the 
>> file, which tests won't have to do.
>
> You are of course technically correct. Currently, AFAIK, Windows is
> the only platform that uses an EXEEXT, and Windows will automatically
> run "foo.exe" is "foo" is requested.
>
> On the other hand, in preparing my package releases, I have found that
> my packages often contain silly errors related to EXEEXT, like
> forgetting EXEEXT in a custom autoconf macro, Makefile, or test. I
> usually catch these errors when I do testing on Windows, but that is
> kind of late in my pre-release process. Starting a Windows virtual
> machine is very slow for me, and I prefer to catch these errors on a
> non-Windows platform, because going through the trouble of running the
> actual Windows VM.
>
> Generally, configuring and building with ac_cv_exeext=.pm and/or
> EXEEXT=.pm works just fine on non-Windows platforms, and helps me
> catch those errors.
>
> So maybe this is technically a feature request and not a bug.
> If you decide not to fix it, it also works for me to just put
> "export EXEEXT" in the Makefile.am manually.

I have never mess around EXEEXT issues myself so maybe I am minimizing
the problem, but IMHO since this feature depends on a particular
portability test setup, it seems more appropriate to let maintainers
decide if they want to export EXEEXT in the test environments or not.

Thanks.

-- 
Mathieu Lirzin
GPG: F2A3 8D7E EB2B 6640 5761  070D 0ADE E100 9460 4D37