Re: [PATCH] tests: skip with-pic test when no "real" pic flag is used.

[Roumen Petrov]

Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2012-09-19 23:02, Roumen Petrov wrote:
> > Peter Rosin wrote:
> > > SNIP]
> > > So, what do you mean?
> > On woe libtool define -DDLL_EXPORT as pic flag . So the value is
> > pic_flag=" -DDLL_EXPORT -DPIC"
> > On some "other" platform "PIC default". I don't have asses to
> > those platforms and I could guess that the value is pic_flag="-DPIC",
> > i.e. only wit defines.
> Ah, now the objection makes sense.  Thanks for spelling it out!
>
> > If I understand patched code properly, skip the test if pic_flag
> > contain only defines. This mean that "other" platform will be skipped
> > too.
> Correct.
>   
> > What about to skip test only if DLL_EXPORT is in pic_flag ?
> Since the patch has already been pushed and it is only a test
> that may be skipped on some "other" platforms, I'm going to
> wait for a bit until someone can confirm if this change has in
> fact caused skips where the test used to pass.  So, not
> rushing this one...

I can not understand why you expect someone to confirm.
a) how many users use platform with "PIC default" ?
b) how many users build  with libtool instead that vendor (proprietary) 
build system ?
c) how many users test libtool ?
d) how many users report skipped tests if no one of the tests fail ?


> Anyway, the change is simple if needed:
So push it.

> -real_pic=false
> +no_dlls=:
>   case " $pic_flag " in
> -[*" "[^" "-]* | *" "-[^D]*]) real_pic=: ;;
> +"* -DDLL_EXPORT *") no_dlls=false ;;
>   esac
> -AT_CHECK([$real_pic || exit 77])
> +AT_CHECK([$no_dlls || exit 77])
>
> Cheers,
> Peter

Roumen