Re: Right way to cope with user error in make test?

[Austin English]

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Dan Kegel  wrote:
> jwhite wrote:
> > The attached patch is one approach - skip the tests in this case.
> > Does this seem like a reasonable approach to folks?
>
> I like it.
>
> I would also like to see us get a lot tougher about
> letting people build wine without a full complement
> of development headers.  Maybe our configure
> should have a sanity check at the end, and abort
> if something optional but very common is missing;
> we could add a --no-sanity-check option to enable
> configuring in that case if it's really intended.
> - Dan

We could have dotests check the config.log to see if there were any
dependencies missing, and warn/fail as appropriate.