On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 10:38 -0500, David Golden wrote: > Dear Oliver, > > The author of Catalyst::Plugin::InflateMore has raised concerns on > cpan-testers-discuss about this report: > > http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.cpan.testers/2008/11/msg2589340.html >
I have more complaints about similar strange "empty" reports, for example: http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.cpan.testers/2008/11/msg2589246.html http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.cpan.testers/2008/11/msg2589453.html > In particular, his Makefile.PL goes to extreme lengths to avoid being > run under automated testing by using the "exit 0" hack to avoid > creating a Makefile under a variety of conditions. However, it's > clear in the report that nevertheless, a Makefile is found and fails > with no "test" rule defined. > > I don't see how his Makefile.PL could ever have generated a Makefile > under CPAN::Reporter::Smoker. And I can't see why the system would > find a Makefile otherwise, much less one without the "test" rule. I'm > not familiar with the s390x architecture so I'm not sure whether that > could somehow be connected. The s390x stuff is nothing really special if you are inside linux. Some of the disk devices are named different but from a user perspective the compiler produces different assembler-code. Thats all. > I'd appreciate if you could please investigate manually and see > whether this is a bug in CPAN, CPAN::Reporter, CPAN::Reporter::Smoker > or somewhere else entirely and let me know what you find. (I've copied > cpan-testers-discuss in case others have ideas that might help in the > investigation.) I had a quick look and I have seen the diskspace looks fine, but there are some oom-traces. I will have a closer look into it tonight. I am on the cpan-testers-discuss and cpan-testers lists for a while since I did some tests on s390x in 2001 or 2002 or so. ;-) Greetings, Oliver -- Oliver Paukstadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
