Re: multiple failures for info tests on cygwin

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2024 00:16:45 +0200
> From: Patrice Dumas <pertusus@free.fr>
> 
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 11:00:22PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 11:43:16PM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 10:21:01PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > > > Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 20:43:45 +0200
> > > > > From: Patrice Dumas <pertusus@free.fr>
> > > > > 
> > > > > Many info tests on cygwin-32 fail (release 7.1 branch).  I attach the
> > > > > info tests log, I can provide more information on configure output, 
> > > > > and
> > > > > some other logs if needed.
> > > > > 
> > > > > =====================================================
> > > > >    GNU Texinfo 7.1.1-20240920: info/test-suite.log
> > > > > =====================================================
> > > > > 
> > > > > # TOTAL: 87
> > > > > # PASS:  51
> > > > > # SKIP:  0
> > > > > # XFAIL: 0
> > > > > # FAIL:  36
> > > > > # XPASS: 0
> > > > > # ERROR: 0
> > > > 
> > > > That's most probably the side effect of using Cygwin tools again: the
> > > > native port of info cannot run many of the tests because the test rig
> > > > uses features not supported by native Windows programs (emulation of
> > > > terminals and other such stuff).  When running the tests with MSYS,
> > > > the test suite detects that and skips those tests, but since you run
> > > > them with Cygwin, I'm guessing that the way the test suite detects
> > > > Windows ports fails for some reason.
> > > > 
> > > > My records from running the test suite in Texinfo-7.1 indicate that 56
> > > > of the info tests were skipped, whereas above you say that none were
> > > > skipped.  So I'm quite sure this is the reason.
> > > 
> > > Actually, my feeling is that it is the absence of posix_openpt that
> > > triggers have_ptys to be false, which in turn causes pseudotty not to
> > > be built.  In the CI tests, cygwin have posix_openpt, while mingw (in
> > > cygwin) does not.
> > > 
> > > Gavin, maybe you could have a look?
> > 
> > My first question is what exactly "mingw in cygwin" means.  If this is
> > some mixture of mingw (i.e. a native MS-Windows environment) and cygwin
> > then it may not be a setup worth supporting, due to subtle incompatibilities
> > between the two, as has been recently discussed.
> > 
> > If it is Texinfo built on cygwin to run in cygwin, as a cygwin program
> > (not a native MS-Windows program), that is different and may be more worth
> > supporting.
> 
> This case is indeed Texinfo built on cygwin to run in cygwin, as a cygwin
> program.

??? Then why are you using Strawberry Perl?  That's not a Cygwin build
of Perl.  The Cygwin Perl should not output CR-LF end-of-line format,
it should output the Unix newline-only EOLs.

Cygwin builds should normally need no patching and fixing, since
Cygwin's purpose is to provide a faithful emulation of a Posix system.

Your original message about this build of Texinfo said:

> I would like to have more tests for mingw (on cygwin) using Bruno CI
> https://github.com/gnu-texinfo/ci-check
> 
> However, 'prove' is not found by configure, by
> AC_CHECK_PROGS([PROVE], [prove], [])
> while perl is found with
> AC_PATH_PROG([PERL], [perl])
> 
> I checked the binary zip provided for strawberry perl, which seems to be
> the Perl used in that case, and there is a prove.bat file provided.
> 
> Do testers with mingw and strawberry Perl have prove found by configure?
> Any idea on what should be done?

This seems to say you are building and testing the MinGW port of
Texinfo, not a Cygwin port.  If it's a Cygwin port, why is MinGW
mentioned and why are Strawberry Perl and the Windows C:\foo\bar
format of file names relevant? none of that are supported by Cygwin,
AFAIK.