Re: [PATCH] gnulib-tool.py: Fix function call on incorrect object.

[Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org>]

Collin Funk wrote:
> > 65% of the .py code has been verified to be in sync with the bash code;
> > 35% still to go. And then, the changes from the gnulib-tool.py.TODO list
> 
> I see. I had it open and compared some of it to the shell script and it
> wasn't too hard to follow. Maybe I could help hack away at some of in my
> free time.

If you want to do help with gnulib-tool.py, I would suggest not to continue
directly with the comparison / review (because it's hard to keep track of
what has been reviewed / tested and what has not), but rather work across
the gnulib-tool.py.TODO file, from the bottom to the top.

> I assume the best way to test it would be to create a small test
> directory with a few modules?

The best way to test it is to take a specific source package that uses a
number of modules (I used wget2, but you can use coreutils or any other
package), run gnulib-tool and gnulib-tool.py with identical command-line
options, and compare/verify the results on either side.

> I think all of the header file
> replacements would break the build so whichever ones avoid using those.

You don't need to go to the './configure' and 'make' stages at this point.
Just ensuring that the outputs of gnulib-tool and gnulib-tool.py are the
same will sufficiently guide you.

Bruno