[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: test-poll vs ioctl
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: test-poll vs ioctl |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:33:38 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.4 |
Hi Simon,
> >> The current situation breaks simple test-cases like this:
> >>
> >> rm -rf m;gnulib-tool --create-testdir --with-tests --dir m poll; cd m;
> >> ./configure --host=i586-mingw32msvc --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu; make check;
> >> cd ..
> >>
> >> Regardless of the solution, I think the above command should work.
> >
> > The above command does work.
>
> No, it fails with latest gnulib master:
>
> i586-mingw32msvc-gcc -g -O2 -o test-perror.exe test-perror.o
> ../gllib/libgnu.a
> i586-mingw32msvc-gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -I.. -I./.. -I../gllib
> -I./../gllib -g -O2 -MT test-poll.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/test-poll.Tpo -c -o
> test-poll.o test-poll.c
> test-poll.c:31:23: error: sys/ioctl.h: No such file or directory
> make[3]: *** [test-poll.o] Error 1
Sure, that's due to the missing dependency to 'ioctl' in modules/poll-tests
and modules/select-tests. When you add that dependency, as you said in your
previous mail, compilation works fine.
> However, I now realize this is a different problem than when --import is
> used.
>
> It seems that dependencies of test modules aren't respected by
> --create-testdir --with-tests, there is no sys_ioctl.in.h file:
>
> address@hidden:~/src/gnulib master$ find m |grep ioct
> m/glm4/sys_ioctl_h.m4
> address@hidden:~/src/gnulib master$
Sure, that's expected since you said that now you are on "latest gnulib master".
To get out of this confusion, I'm committing these missing dependencies.
> > b) Split winsock.c into accept.c, connect.c, etc. - like we are doing
> > in gnulib for most other functionalities. The inline functions
> > (FD_TO_SOCKET, SOCKET_TO_FD, set_winsock_errno) can go to a private
> > header file, let's say, w32sock.h or socket-internal.h.
> >
> > I would prefer b), because it's leads to a more understandable code
> > structure.
>
> I don't care strongly, but b) seems easier to understand so I would
> prefer it too. Since Paolo didn't object to either proposal, I am
> preparing patches to implement b) now. Will push and e-mail them
> separately.
Thanks!
Bruno
2008-10-21 Bruno Haible <address@hidden>
* modules/poll-tests (Depends-on): Add sys_ioctl, ioctl.
* modules/select-tests (Depends-on): Likewise.
Reported by Simon Josefsson.
--- modules/poll-tests.orig 2008-10-21 12:32:26.000000000 +0200
+++ modules/poll-tests 2008-10-21 12:29:54.000000000 +0200
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
sys_socket
netinet_in
arpa_inet
+sys_ioctl
extensions
inet_pton
errno
@@ -17,6 +18,7 @@
listen
connect
accept
+ioctl
close
configure.ac:
--- modules/select-tests.orig 2008-10-21 12:32:26.000000000 +0200
+++ modules/select-tests 2008-10-21 12:30:01.000000000 +0200
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
stdbool
netinet_in
arpa_inet
+sys_ioctl
extensions
inet_pton
errno
@@ -16,6 +17,7 @@
listen
connect
accept
+ioctl
close
configure.ac:
- Re: test-poll vs ioctl, (continued)
- Re: test-poll vs ioctl, Simon Josefsson, 2008/10/20
- Re: test-poll vs ioctl, Bruno Haible, 2008/10/20
- Re: test-poll vs ioctl, Paolo Bonzini, 2008/10/20
- Re: test-poll vs ioctl, Simon Josefsson, 2008/10/21
- winsock.c split, Simon Josefsson, 2008/10/21
- Re: winsock.c split, Bruno Haible, 2008/10/21
- Re: winsock.c split, Simon Josefsson, 2008/10/21
- Re: winsock.c split, Simon Josefsson, 2008/10/21
- Re: winsock.c split, Bruno Haible, 2008/10/25
- Re: winsock.c split, Bruno Haible, 2008/10/25
- Re: test-poll vs ioctl,
Bruno Haible <=
- Re: test-poll vs ioctl, Simon Josefsson, 2008/10/21