[PATCH libguestfs] build: avoid "make sytnax-check" failure
FYI, just pushed:
From 322ff984a39d53422b772bfeb8f69e7c648da8c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jim Meyering <meyering@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 21:01:48 +0200 Subject: [PATCH libguestfs] build: avoid "make sytnax-check" failure
* daemon/configure.ac: Change a leading TAB to 8 spaces. --- daemon/configure.ac | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon/configure.ac b/daemon/configure.ac index 62c28ee..b0c7f26 100644 --- a/daemon/configure.ac +++ b/daemon/configure.ac @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ dnl Check for libselinux (optional). AC_CHECK_HEADERS([selinux/selinux.h]) AC_CHECK_LIB([selinux],[setexeccon],[ LIBS="-lselinux $LIBS" - have_libselinux="$ac_cv_header_selinux_selinux_h" + have_libselinux="$ac_cv_header_selinux_selinux_h" AC_CHECK_FUNCS([setcon getcon]) ],[have_libselinux=no]) if test "x$have_libselinux" = "xyes"; then -- 1.6.4.357.gfd68c
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 09:05:01PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
FYI, just pushed:
Thanks. Sorry, I have 'make check' in my head, but not 'make syntax-check', which is why I seem to be adding tab characters. Is there any reason why we wouldn't add the following to Makefile.am? check:: syntax-check Or failing that can we add it to HACKING? Rich. -- Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones New in Fedora 11: Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 70 libraries supprt'd http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW http://www.annexia.org/fedora_mingw
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 09:05:01PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
FYI, just pushed:
Thanks.
Sorry, I have 'make check' in my head, but not 'make syntax-check',
No problem.
which is why I seem to be adding tab characters.
Is there any reason why we wouldn't add the following to Makefile.am?
check:: syntax-check
Or failing that can we add it to HACKING?
Either works. Your call. I think of a "make check" failure as fundamentally more serious, while the syntax-check tests are more in a "would-be-nice" vein. Personally, I don't lose sleep if "make syntax-check" is broken for a few days, and perhaps its better that those rules don't distract too much. However, I do make sure that "make distcheck" (which covers both) always succeeds around release time.
participants (2)
-
Jim Meyering -
Richard W.M. Jones