Re: [PATCH] {yacc-work} coverage: more on 'yacc -d' and recovery from deleted headers

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 01:48:16PM CET:
> On Saturday 29 January 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > FYI, I think the test has some overlap with one of the make -n tests
> > that ensures the deleted header recovery doesn't build files in dry
> > run mode.
> >
> Not exactly; it partly (and minimally) overlaps with `yacc7.test' (which
> is an hodgepodge anyway), and with `yacc8.test' (which checks the
> behaviour of the subdir-objects option).

Ah no, I meant yaccdry.  Sorry for not looking it up before.
But the overlap is not a problem.

> > > +BUILT_SOURCES = parse1.h p2-parse2.h
> > 
> > Interestingly, the test also passes for me when I omit the BUILT_SOURCES
> > line.  Bug in the test or just incidental?
> >
> Bug, sort of.  The test with BUILT_SOURCES removed passes for me too
> if 'make' is not run in parallele mode, but fails with:
> 
>   $ MAKE='make -j2' ./yacc-deleted-headers.test
> 
> By changing the order in which files are listed in the p{1,2}_SOURCES
> variables, I can make the test fail consistently if the BUILT_SOURCES
> definition is removed.  See the squash-in below.
> 
> But there's more.  If I also make `main3.c' be the first entry in
> p3_SOURCES, the test consistently fails because make tries to build
> `main3.o' before the header `parse3.h' is created by yacc.  This
> is fixed by the squash-in, too.

> I will push as soon as you ACK the squashed-in diffs.

I agree with everything except ...

>  BUILT_SOURCES = parse1.h p2-parse2.h
> address@hidden@: parse3.h

... this line shouldn't be there, other than to workaround
a bug in automake; and if it does, then it deserves a comment.

Thanks,
Ralf