LTP 20091031 Makefiles totally broken?!?

[Andi Kleen-3]

I ran configure, which seems to spend 99% of its time
checking for stuff that is always there on any Linux,
and after that I just get

# make
make: `testcases/realtime/configure' is up to date.
#

Can we please have the old Makefiles back?

Thanks,

-Andi

--
ak@... -- Speaking for myself only.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 06 November 2009 04:57:45 Andi Kleen wrote:
> I ran configure, which seems to spend 99% of its time
> checking for stuff that is always there on any Linux,

not really.  most of the configure checks are there because people have
complained about specific issues trying to run on older linux distros.  and we
arent actively blocking using LTP on other *nix systems.

> and after that I just get
>
> # make
> make: `testcases/realtime/configure' is up to date.
> #

-ENEEDINFO

are you using live cvs ?  latest release ?  what distro ?  what version of
autoconf/make ?  what does `make -d` show ?

> Can we please have the old Makefiles back?

no
-mike


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Andi Kleen-3]

On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 07:16:39AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 06 November 2009 04:57:45 Andi Kleen wrote:
> > I ran configure, which seems to spend 99% of its time
> > checking for stuff that is always there on any Linux,
>
> not really.  most of the configure checks are there because people have
> complained about specific issues trying to run on older linux distros.  and we

I always just deleted the tests that didn't build. That's far better
than not building at all like now.

> arent actively blocking using LTP on other *nix systems.

yes you're just actively blocking running LTP on Linux now it seems.

>
> > and after that I just get
> >
> > # make
> > make: `testcases/realtime/configure' is up to date.
> > #
>
> -ENEEDINFO
>
> are you using live cvs ?  latest release ?  what distro ?  what version of

See Subject on SUSE 10.0

> autoconf/make ?  what does `make -d` show ?

autoconf doesn't matter because I didn't regenerate the script.

GNU Make 3.80
Copyright (C) 2002  Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.
There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Reading makefiles...
Reading makefile `Makefile'...
Reading makefile `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/env_pre.mk' (search path) (no ~ expansion)...
Reading makefile `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/config.mk' (search path) (don't care) (no ~ expansion)...
Reading makefile `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/automake.mk' (search path) (no ~ expansion)...
Updating makefiles....
 Considering target file `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/automake.mk'.
  Looking for an implicit rule for `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/automake.mk'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `automake.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/automake.mk,v'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `automake.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/RCS/automake.mk,v'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `automake.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/RCS/automake.mk'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `automake.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/s.automake.mk'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `automake.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/SCCS/s.automake.mk'.
  No implicit rule found for `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/automake.mk'.
  Finished prerequisites of target file `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/automake.mk'.
 No need to remake target `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/automake.mk'.
 Considering target file `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/config.mk'.
  Looking for an implicit rule for `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/config.mk'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `config.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/config.mk,v'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `config.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/RCS/config.mk,v'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `config.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/RCS/config.mk'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `config.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/s.config.mk'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `config.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/SCCS/s.config.mk'.
  No implicit rule found for `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/config.mk'.
  Finished prerequisites of target file `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/config.mk'.
 No need to remake target `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/config.mk'.
 Considering target file `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/env_pre.mk'.
  Looking for an implicit rule for `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/env_pre.mk'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `env_pre.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/env_pre.mk,v'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `env_pre.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/RCS/env_pre.mk,v'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `env_pre.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/RCS/env_pre.mk'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `env_pre.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/s.env_pre.mk'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `env_pre.mk'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/SCCS/s.env_pre.mk'.
  No implicit rule found for `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/env_pre.mk'.
  Finished prerequisites of target file `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/env_pre.mk'.
 No need to remake target `/root/ltp-full-20091031/include/mk/env_pre.mk'.
 Considering target file `Makefile'.
  Looking for an implicit rule for `Makefile'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `Makefile'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `Makefile,v'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `Makefile'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `RCS/Makefile,v'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `Makefile'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `RCS/Makefile'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `Makefile'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `s.Makefile'.
  Trying pattern rule with stem `Makefile'.
  Trying implicit prerequisite `SCCS/s.Makefile'.
  No implicit rule found for `Makefile'.
  Finished prerequisites of target file `Makefile'.
 No need to remake target `Makefile'.
Updating goal targets....
Considering target file `testcases/realtime/configure'.
 Finished prerequisites of target file `testcases/realtime/configure'.
No need to remake target `testcases/realtime/configure'.
make: `testcases/realtime/configure' is up to date.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 06 November 2009 08:09:06 Andi Kleen wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 07:16:39AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 06 November 2009 04:57:45 Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > I ran configure, which seems to spend 99% of its time
> > > checking for stuff that is always there on any Linux,
> >
> > not really.  most of the configure checks are there because people have
> > complained about specific issues trying to run on older linux distros.
> > and we
>
> I always just deleted the tests that didn't build. That's far better
> than not building at all like now.

perhaps an acceptable workaround for you, but certainly not for most people

> > arent actively blocking using LTP on other *nix systems.
>
> yes you're just actively blocking running LTP on Linux now it seems.

please refrain from filling e-mails with unrelated BS

> > > and after that I just get
> > >
> > > # make
> > > make: `testcases/realtime/configure' is up to date.
> > > #
> >
> > -ENEEDINFO
> >
> > are you using live cvs ?  latest release ?  what distro ?  what version
> > of
>
> See Subject on SUSE 10.0
>
> > autoconf/make ?  what does `make -d` show ?
>
> autoconf doesn't matter because I didn't regenerate the script.
>
> GNU Make 3.80

looks like a bug in make-3.80.  works fine with make-3.81.  care to take a
look Garrett ?

usually i just install older versions on my system as `make-$VER` to make
testing different ones easy.  since all the makefiles use $(MAKE), this
shouldnt be a problem to execute `make-$VER` instead of `make`.
-mike


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[yaneurabeya]

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 5:21 AM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@...> wrote:

> On Friday 06 November 2009 08:09:06 Andi Kleen wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 07:16:39AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > On Friday 06 November 2009 04:57:45 Andi Kleen wrote:
>> > > I ran configure, which seems to spend 99% of its time
>> > > checking for stuff that is always there on any Linux,
>> >
>> > not really.  most of the configure checks are there because people have
>> > complained about specific issues trying to run on older linux distros.
>> > and we
>>
>> I always just deleted the tests that didn't build. That's far better
>> than not building at all like now.
>
> perhaps an acceptable workaround for you, but certainly not for most people
>
>> > arent actively blocking using LTP on other *nix systems.
>>
>> yes you're just actively blocking running LTP on Linux now it seems.
>
> please refrain from filling e-mails with unrelated BS
>
>> > > and after that I just get
>> > >
>> > > # make
>> > > make: `testcases/realtime/configure' is up to date.
>> > > #
>> >
>> > -ENEEDINFO
>> >
>> > are you using live cvs ?  latest release ?  what distro ?  what version
>> > of
>>
>> See Subject on SUSE 10.0
>>
>> > autoconf/make ?  what does `make -d` show ?
>>
>> autoconf doesn't matter because I didn't regenerate the script.
>>
>> GNU Make 3.80
>
> looks like a bug in make-3.80.  works fine with make-3.81.  care to take a
> look Garrett ?
>
> usually i just install older versions on my system as `make-$VER` to make
> testing different ones easy.  since all the makefiles use $(MAKE), this
> shouldnt be a problem to execute `make-$VER` instead of `make`.

Hi Andi,

As I just wrote in the INSTALL file after the release (I apologize for
not catching this beforehand, but all of the systems I use -- Fedora,
Gentoo, RHEL 4 update 6, Ubuntu -- have make 3.81):

======================================================

In order to compile and use pan, you must have bison/yacc, flex, and make
3.81+ installed.

# ...

make 3.81 can be obtained here:
- http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/make/make-3.81.tar.bz2

# ...

Common Issues
----------------------

Issue:    When executing make [all] it says:

    " *** No rule to make target `/$*', needed by `pan-all'.  Stop."

Solution: You must upgrade to make 3.81. Please see the Requirements
section above.

Issue:    When executing make [all] it says something like:

    # ...
    install -m 00644 "/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/include/test.h"
"/scratch/ltp-install12/include/test.h"
    install -m 00644 "/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/include/tlibio.h"
"/scratch/ltp-install12/include/tlibio.h"
    install -m 00644 "/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/include/usctest.h"
"/scratch/ltp-install12/include/usctest.h"
    install -m 00644 "/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/include/write_log.h"
"/scratch/ltp-install12/include/write_log.h"
    make[1]: Leaving directory `/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/include'
    make -C lib -f "/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/lib/Makefile" all
    make[1]: Entering directory `/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/lib'
    " *** No rule to make target `dataascii.o', needed by `libltp.a'.
Stop." # <-- the error

Solution: You cannot build LTP with -r / --no-builtin-rules and/or
          -R / --no-builtin-variables specified. LTP relies heavily on built-in
          implicit rules and variables to function properly.

======================================================

So yes, there are known issues with using make versions <3.81. The
reason being that some macros and functions that I use to determine
absolute path, etc were not available in make 3.80.

I've considered adding a configure check for the make version. I'm
probably going to do it this weekend to avoid support issues like
these.

Thanks,
-Garrett

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[yaneurabeya]

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@...> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 5:21 AM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@...> wrote:
>> On Friday 06 November 2009 08:09:06 Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 07:16:39AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> > On Friday 06 November 2009 04:57:45 Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> > > I ran configure, which seems to spend 99% of its time
>>> > > checking for stuff that is always there on any Linux,
>>> >
>>> > not really.  most of the configure checks are there because people have
>>> > complained about specific issues trying to run on older linux distros.
>>> > and we
>>>
>>> I always just deleted the tests that didn't build. That's far better
>>> than not building at all like now.
>>
>> perhaps an acceptable workaround for you, but certainly not for most people
>>
>>> > arent actively blocking using LTP on other *nix systems.
>>>
>>> yes you're just actively blocking running LTP on Linux now it seems.
>>
>> please refrain from filling e-mails with unrelated BS
>>
>>> > > and after that I just get
>>> > >
>>> > > # make
>>> > > make: `testcases/realtime/configure' is up to date.
>>> > > #
>>> >
>>> > -ENEEDINFO
>>> >
>>> > are you using live cvs ?  latest release ?  what distro ?  what version
>>> > of
>>>
>>> See Subject on SUSE 10.0
>>>
>>> > autoconf/make ?  what does `make -d` show ?
>>>
>>> autoconf doesn't matter because I didn't regenerate the script.
>>>
>>> GNU Make 3.80
>>
>> looks like a bug in make-3.80.  works fine with make-3.81.  care to take a
>> look Garrett ?
>>
>> usually i just install older versions on my system as `make-$VER` to make
>> testing different ones easy.  since all the makefiles use $(MAKE), this
>> shouldnt be a problem to execute `make-$VER` instead of `make`.
>
> Hi Andi,
>
> As I just wrote in the INSTALL file after the release (I apologize for
> not catching this beforehand, but all of the systems I use -- Fedora,
> Gentoo, RHEL 4 update 6, Ubuntu -- have make 3.81):
>
> ======================================================
>
> In order to compile and use pan, you must have bison/yacc, flex, and make
> 3.81+ installed.

I reread this statement and it is ambiguous. I just changed it in CVS
to state the following:

1. In order to compile ltp you must have make 3.81+.
2. In order to compile and use pan, you must have bison/yacc, and flex
installed.

> # ...
>
> make 3.81 can be obtained here:
> - http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/make/make-3.81.tar.bz2
>
> # ...
>
> Common Issues
> ----------------------
>
> Issue:    When executing make [all] it says:
>
>    " *** No rule to make target `/$*', needed by `pan-all'.  Stop."
>
> Solution: You must upgrade to make 3.81. Please see the Requirements
> section above.
>
> Issue:    When executing make [all] it says something like:
>
>    # ...
>    install -m 00644 "/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/include/test.h"
> "/scratch/ltp-install12/include/test.h"
>    install -m 00644 "/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/include/tlibio.h"
> "/scratch/ltp-install12/include/tlibio.h"
>    install -m 00644 "/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/include/usctest.h"
> "/scratch/ltp-install12/include/usctest.h"
>    install -m 00644 "/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/include/write_log.h"
> "/scratch/ltp-install12/include/write_log.h"
>    make[1]: Leaving directory `/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/include'
>    make -C lib -f "/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/lib/Makefile" all
>    make[1]: Entering directory `/scratch/ltp-dev2/ltp/lib'
>    " *** No rule to make target `dataascii.o', needed by `libltp.a'.
> Stop." # <-- the error
>
> Solution: You cannot build LTP with -r / --no-builtin-rules and/or
>          -R / --no-builtin-variables specified. LTP relies heavily on built-in
>          implicit rules and variables to function properly.
>
> ======================================================
>
> So yes, there are known issues with using make versions <3.81. The
> reason being that some macros and functions that I use to determine
> absolute path, etc were not available in make 3.80.
>
> I've considered adding a configure check for the make version. I'm
> probably going to do it this weekend to avoid support issues like
> these.
>
> Thanks,
> -Garrett
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 06 November 2009 13:04:51 Garrett Cooper wrote:
> As I just wrote in the INSTALL file after the release (I apologize for
> not catching this beforehand, but all of the systems I use -- Fedora,
> Gentoo, RHEL 4 update 6, Ubuntu -- have make 3.81):

hrm, it sucks to not support make 3.80.  while make 3.81 has been out for
three years now, make 3.80 support would increase the coverage to 8 years.  
but if you've looked at the situation and found 3.80 support to be non
trivial, i wont whine too loud.

> In order to compile and use pan, you must have bison/yacc, flex, and make
> 3.81+ installed.

if we're forcing make-3.81+, then make it explicit:
ifneq ($(findstring x3.7,x$(MAKE_VERSION)),)
NEED_NEWER_MAKE := y
endif
ifeq ($(MAKE_VERSION),3.80)
NEED_NEWER_MAKE := y
endif
ifeq ($(NEED_NEWER_MAKE),y)
$(error ..)
endif

also, i thought we were going to rename the top level Makefile to GNUmakefile
and add a dummy Makefile that just spat out "sorry, ltp requires GNU make".
-mike


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Andi Kleen-3]

> So yes, there are known issues with using make versions <3.81. The

For me it seems more the known issue is in the Makefile. 3.80
is a widely used Make version.

> reason being that some macros and functions that I use to determine
> absolute path, etc were not available in make 3.80.

Most of my infrastructure in test systems is based on SUSE 10.0
and it's impractical to upgrade make everywhere.

I find it very sad that LTP now descended into "version hell"
and abandoned old distributions.
 
> I've considered adding a configure check for the make version. I'm
> probably going to do it this weekend to avoid support issues like
> these.

That's not a solution.

Please just fix the makefiles or revert this misguided change
and give us working makefiles back.

>From a quick look at the mailing list archives that doesn't
even seem to be the only problem with this "improvement".

Thanks.

-Andi

--
ak@... -- Speaking for myself only.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Andi Kleen-3]

On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 03:09:02PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 06 November 2009 13:04:51 Garrett Cooper wrote:
> > As I just wrote in the INSTALL file after the release (I apologize for
> > not catching this beforehand, but all of the systems I use -- Fedora,
> > Gentoo, RHEL 4 update 6, Ubuntu -- have make 3.81):
>
> hrm, it sucks to not support make 3.80.  while make 3.81 has been out for
> three years now, make 3.80 support would increase the coverage to 8 years.  
> but if you've looked at the situation and found 3.80 support to be non
> trivial, i wont whine too loud.

Well I do whine. I essentially means that I won't be able to use
newer LTP versions anymore in my standard test setup. And I know
it's pretty common with kernel hackers to use old user lands:
you're basically cutting yourself off from your customer base.

-Andi

--
ak@... -- Speaking for myself only.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 06 November 2009 14:13:43 Andi Kleen wrote:

> > I've considered adding a configure check for the make version. I'm
> > probably going to do it this weekend to avoid support issues like
> > these.
>
> That's not a solution.
>
> Please just fix the makefiles or revert this misguided change
> and give us working makefiles back.
>
> From a quick look at the mailing list archives that doesn't
> even seem to be the only problem with this "improvement".

again, please stop wasting our time with your "revert it" comments.  it isnt
going to happen.  especially considering you apparently have no signficant
plans in helping maintain the huge code base that is LTP.

we can look at working around bugs in make-3.80 if/since there are a number of
people who would like this functionality.
-mike


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Nate Straz-2]

On Nov  6 20:13, Andi Kleen wrote:

> > So yes, there are known issues with using make versions <3.81. The
>
> For me it seems more the known issue is in the Makefile. 3.80
> is a widely used Make version.
>
> > reason being that some macros and functions that I use to determine
> > absolute path, etc were not available in make 3.80.
>
> Most of my infrastructure in test systems is based on SUSE 10.0
> and it's impractical to upgrade make everywhere.

openSUSE 10.3 does include make-3.81.  I hope upgrading to the latest
point release won't disrupt your test systems.

http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/10.3/repo/oss/suse/x86_64/make-3.81-66.x86_64.rpm

Nate

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[yaneurabeya]

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@...> wrote:

> On Friday 06 November 2009 14:13:43 Andi Kleen wrote:
>> > I've considered adding a configure check for the make version. I'm
>> > probably going to do it this weekend to avoid support issues like
>> > these.
>>
>> That's not a solution.
>>
>> Please just fix the makefiles or revert this misguided change
>> and give us working makefiles back.
>>
>> From a quick look at the mailing list archives that doesn't
>> even seem to be the only problem with this "improvement".
>
> again, please stop wasting our time with your "revert it" comments.  it isnt
> going to happen.  especially considering you apparently have no signficant
> plans in helping maintain the huge code base that is LTP.
>
> we can look at working around bugs in make-3.80 if/since there are a number of
> people who would like this functionality.

I'll see whether or not there are other ways to skin the proverbial
can to get make 3.80 to work, but the problem is that what I'm going
to be providing in make <3.81 will be hacks, not solutions to fill in
functional gaps.

Also, mass deploying (IMO) make 3.81 shouldn't be that hard if the IT
infrastructure is setup properly with NFS or some other mass-package
deployment system. It's simply:

./configure [config-options]
make all install

Thanks,
-Garrett

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Andi Kleen-3]

On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 03:39:21PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:

> On Friday 06 November 2009 14:13:43 Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > I've considered adding a configure check for the make version. I'm
> > > probably going to do it this weekend to avoid support issues like
> > > these.
> >
> > That's not a solution.
> >
> > Please just fix the makefiles or revert this misguided change
> > and give us working makefiles back.
> >
> > From a quick look at the mailing list archives that doesn't
> > even seem to be the only problem with this "improvement".
>
> again, please stop wasting our time with your "revert it" comments.  it isnt

That's the standard strategy to fix regressions if the submitter
is unwilling to fix newly introduced bugs.

> going to happen.  especially considering you apparently have no signficant
> plans in helping maintain the huge code base that is LTP.

I submitted some tests and fixes in the past, but yes I'm primarily a user.

> we can look at working around bugs in make-3.80 if/since there are a number of
> people who would like this functionality.

Are you saying that LTP as a project is not interested in fixing regressions?

-Andi

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 06 November 2009 14:44:11 Garrett Cooper wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 06 November 2009 14:13:43 Andi Kleen wrote:
> >> > I've considered adding a configure check for the make version. I'm
> >> > probably going to do it this weekend to avoid support issues like
> >> > these.
> >>
> >> That's not a solution.
> >>
> >> Please just fix the makefiles or revert this misguided change
> >> and give us working makefiles back.
> >>
> >> From a quick look at the mailing list archives that doesn't
> >> even seem to be the only problem with this "improvement".
> >
> > again, please stop wasting our time with your "revert it" comments.  it
> > isnt going to happen.  especially considering you apparently have no
> > signficant plans in helping maintain the huge code base that is LTP.
> >
> > we can look at working around bugs in make-3.80 if/since there are a
> > number of people who would like this functionality.
>
> I'll see whether or not there are other ways to skin the proverbial
> can to get make 3.80 to work, but the problem is that what I'm going
> to be providing in make <3.81 will be hacks, not solutions to fill in
> functional gaps.

let's at least start out with the known bugs/limitations and see how/if each
can be addressed.

sticking things behind something like this should be fine too:
ifeq ($(MAKE_VERSION),3.80)
# screw you make!
...
endif
-mike


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 06 November 2009 14:50:36 Andi Kleen wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 03:39:21PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 06 November 2009 14:13:43 Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > I've considered adding a configure check for the make version. I'm
> > > > probably going to do it this weekend to avoid support issues like
> > > > these.
> > >
> > > That's not a solution.
> > >
> > > Please just fix the makefiles or revert this misguided change
> > > and give us working makefiles back.
> > >
> > > From a quick look at the mailing list archives that doesn't
> > > even seem to be the only problem with this "improvement".
> >
> > again, please stop wasting our time with your "revert it" comments.  it
> > isnt
>
> That's the standard strategy to fix regressions if the submitter
> is unwilling to fix newly introduced bugs.

your position on how to "fix" things is irrelevant here, nor is it helping in
any way.  drop it.

> > we can look at working around bugs in make-3.80 if/since there are a
> > number of people who would like this functionality.
>
> Are you saying that LTP as a project is not interested in fixing
>  regressions?

ive already made my position pretty clear in this statement.  support for old
versions of tools will continually be phased out over time.  the exact cut off
time will largely be dictated by the needs of the larger user base.  
"cleverly" defining behavior as "regressions" notwithstanding.
-mike


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Andi Kleen-3]

On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 02:43:35PM -0500, Nate Straz wrote:

> On Nov  6 20:13, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > So yes, there are known issues with using make versions <3.81. The
> >
> > For me it seems more the known issue is in the Makefile. 3.80
> > is a widely used Make version.
> >
> > > reason being that some macros and functions that I use to determine
> > > absolute path, etc were not available in make 3.80.
> >
> > Most of my infrastructure in test systems is based on SUSE 10.0
> > and it's impractical to upgrade make everywhere.
>
> openSUSE 10.3 does include make-3.81.  I hope upgrading to the latest
> point release won't disrupt your test systems.

It does; anything udev based has unacceptable boot time penalty
with nfsroot. That's why they are still on 10.0.

-Andi

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 06 November 2009 14:50:36 Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 03:39:21PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > going to happen.  especially considering you apparently have no
> > signficant plans in helping maintain the huge code base that is LTP.
>
> I submitted some tests and fixes in the past, but yes I'm primarily a user.

right -- you've certainly contributed useful pieces in the past which is why i
used the word "significant", but tackling the entire code base like Garrett
has isnt a semi-trivial task, as well as fielding follow up reports.  i
imagine it's been pretty draining on him.
-mike


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[yaneurabeya]

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Andi Kleen <andi@...> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 02:43:35PM -0500, Nate Straz wrote:
>> On Nov  6 20:13, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> > > So yes, there are known issues with using make versions <3.81. The
>> >
>> > For me it seems more the known issue is in the Makefile. 3.80
>> > is a widely used Make version.
>> >
>> > > reason being that some macros and functions that I use to determine
>> > > absolute path, etc were not available in make 3.80.
>> >
>> > Most of my infrastructure in test systems is based on SUSE 10.0
>> > and it's impractical to upgrade make everywhere.
>>
>> openSUSE 10.3 does include make-3.81.  I hope upgrading to the latest
>> point release won't disrupt your test systems.
>
> It does; anything udev based has unacceptable boot time penalty
> with nfsroot. That's why they are still on 10.0.

Andi,
    You can actually cross-compile, use out-of-build-tree and
bootstrap the system so it can effectively netboot with LTP installed.
This is something that we're doing in Cisco today, and it's something
I highly recommend doing -- especially if you have higher quality
hardware with newer OS'es doing the building for you.
    Granted, it does require more work setting everything up from
scratch, but once the work is done, it's a lot easier as far as
long-term maintenance is concerned if you're developing regularly on a
particular revisioned code-base.
    I'm more than happy to provide solutions, but they need to be
functional, stable, and easy-to-maintain longterm. Providing hacks for
make 3.80 isn't necessarily a good thing for the project to support
and it may not even solve your problem 100% (you may run into
stability issues using $(shell readlink -f "") instead of $(abspath ).
Then it comes back to tools -- I'm basically going to have to write
checks in autoconf to make sure that readlink does as planned (isn't
broken), and it's going to be more painful for you performance wise to
have this hack in place, as opposed to just having an upgraded version
of make, which also has resolved several bugs between 3.80 and 3.81.
HTH,
-Garrett

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Andi Kleen-3]

On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 12:25:23PM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>     You can actually cross-compile, use out-of-build-tree and
> bootstrap the system so it can effectively netboot with LTP installed.
> This is something that we're doing in Cisco today, and it's something
> I highly recommend doing -- especially if you have higher quality
> hardware with newer OS'es doing the building for you.

The hardware I'm using for testing is perfectly capable of
building LTP itself.

>     Granted, it does require more work setting everything up from
> scratch, but once the work is done, it's a lot easier as far as
> long-term maintenance is concerned if you're developing regularly on a
> particular revisioned code-base.

I would prefer to not get into any cross compiling mess. It would
require either static linking or maintenance of a separate build
tree with own libraries, both have many drawbacks.

>     I'm more than happy to provide solutions, but they need to be
> functional, stable, and easy-to-maintain longterm. Providing hacks for
> make 3.80 isn't necessarily a good thing for the project to support

What hacks?

make 3.80 has build whole distributions with millions of LOCs, it's unclear
to me why it shouldn't be able to build LTP too.

I'm pretty sure that not supporting older distributions is very
necessarily a bad thing.

> and it may not even solve your problem 100% (you may run into
> stability issues using $(shell readlink -f "") instead of $(abspath ).

I did a quick test of readlink -f and it seems to work here.

> Then it comes back to tools -- I'm basically going to have to write
> checks in autoconf to make sure that readlink does as planned (isn't
> broken), and it's going to be more painful for you performance wise to
> have this hack in place, as opposed to just having an upgraded version
> of make, which also has resolved several bugs between 3.80 and 3.81.

I don't understand: the key is not to test for commands used
by makefiles, but simply only use features which are generally available.

I'm also highly surprised that this doesn't work with autoconf -- I thought
the whole point of autoconf was to generate portable makefiles, but
in this case it seems to especially generate a non portable Makefile.

I suspect it's actually not a autoconf problem by itself, but
something that's in the LTP templates.

-Andi

--
ak@... -- Speaking for myself only.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 06 November 2009 16:02:25 Andi Kleen wrote:
> I'm also highly surprised that this doesn't work with autoconf -- I thought
> the whole point of autoconf was to generate portable makefiles, but
> in this case it seems to especially generate a non portable Makefile.

that is not the point of autoconf at all; it has nothing to do with makefiles.  
that is the point of automake -- which we specifically are not using.  there
are way too many Makefiles that would need to be generated.
-mike


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list