Re: [PATCH] tests: feed -no-undefined when linking libtool libraries

[Peter Rosin]

On 2012-10-03 05:45, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> On Oct 3, 2012, at 12:32 AM, Peter Rosin <address@hidden> wrote:
>> [snipped loads of stuff]
> 
> [snipped a bit more stuff]
> 
>> You're saying that you are about to:
>>
>> $ git checkout master
>> $ git merge --strategy=recursive -X theirs gary/reredo-test-operand-order \
>> -m 'bla bla bla'
>>
>> right?
> 
> Pretty much.  But that's just to show the merge in git history, the end
> effect will be identical to having committed the diff back to master.
> 
>> Is that better than committing the diff between reredo-... and master
>> as a revert-light? Why else would you have gone through all the trouble
>> of making all the smaller commits in the first place?
> 
> It's better to show the branch merged in for future archaeology; the less
> time anyone else has to waste staring at 962aa91, the better a place the
> world will be.  And I'm all about making the world a better place! :-)
> 
>> I just fired up a test suite run...

Good news! Clean runs on Cygwin, MSYS/MinGW and MSYS/MSVC.

> Thanks!  I'm crossing my fingers -- I'll sleep a lot better when we've put
> this one behind us.

Now into nitpicking and other useless ramblings...

The patch "libtool: unroll nested if into a single case statement" has
whitespace issues (leading spaces instead of tabs on a few lines), and it
should perhaps use a simple catch-all "*" (retaining the "fast_install is
set to needless" comment) as the last case instead of "*,needless" that
you have put there. But I guess it's harmless as $fast_install is not any
random string, sans hacks, so no rereredo request from me, just a
nitpick that I saw when reviewing the "libtool: ..." changes at the
tip of gary/reredo-test-operand-order. Can always be cleaned up later,
if someone has the energy.

I also wonder about the relationship between "libtool: fold if into a
compound OR statement when more readable" and the next commit "libtool:
simplify multiple string tests". What I mean is that about half the
tests from the later commit fit the pattern of the first, why did you
for example not change

        if test yes,no = "$avoid_version,$need_version"; then
          major=
          versuffix=
          verstring=
        fi

into

        test yes,no = "$avoid_version,$need_version" && {
          major=
          versuffix=
          verstring=
        }

(or some such) when you where at it? (but to me it looks like churn)

Anyway, to sum up, I'm ok with merging reredo branch into master.
Lets put this to rest now, thanks!

Cheers,
Peter