I checked all those reports and despite the "BSD" part, I don't see much
that can be related that they have in common. There are different
configurations of perl (some with ithreads, others without it) and SO
versions. Also, all have in common this failure (but not always for the
same tests):
Non-zero wait status: 139
Parse errors: No plan found in TAP output
One thing that is not easy to detected is if those system are running
under virtualization or not (maybe we could add this to reports as
static information?). My newest OpenBSD was a VM running on Virtualbox 5
and the host Microsoft Windows 7.
My older VM was also running on Virtualbox, but under Linux and version
4.3.36. You can check the PASS report here:
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/20aa9630-7430-11e6-a754-2713ddf53d17
I'm don't know about the other BSD OSes, but OpenBSD hasn't a good
reputation on VMs, but I never was able to confirm an issue with Virtualbox.
After my first success on installing Moose, I took a chance to upgrade
all installed modules. After that, I manually checked the reports and
see that there was a failure with Sub::Name. Since Moose was already at
the latest version, nothing was executed related to it.
I tried to manually install Sub::Name from the CPAN shell. It failed due
a core dump. Since I was saving the reports on disk, I manually included
information to the report and submit it. I'm not sure if this will work,
but let me know if doesn't, I have a copy and can send it by e-mail in
private (or to the group if it accepts text attachments).
The interesting part is that I did "look Sub::Name" after the failure,
execute "make clean" and repeat all the process for test it again... and
it passed all tests and got installed.
Went back again to install Moose... I couldn't even pass the Makefile.PL
step. It fails and generates a large core dump on the VM.
So, my guess is that we have something wrong with Sub::Name.
Em 06-09-2016 16:31, Karen Etheridge escreveu:
I don't know if this is helpful, but I've been seeing widespread issues
with FreeBSD and NetBSD as well lately. I've been receiving a lot of
FAIL reports containing segmentation faults from FreeBSD and NetBSD that
look similar to the OpenBSD issues, for example:
FreeBSD (BinGOs):
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/eef9bd38-6704-11e6-ab41-c893a58a4b8c
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/8665c62c-73c0-11e6-8807-814d1da4c10f
NetBSD (Nigel Horne):
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/8d46746e-73b1-11e6-b850-10220ec14a5e
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/42d3ed70-73ad-11e6-b850-10220ec14a5e
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/ae162bf6-73ae-11e6-b850-10220ec14a5e
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/3ec4326c-73ad-11e6-b850-10220ec14a5e
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/98868544-73b1-11e6-b850-10220ec14a5e
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/a34aa63c-73b0-11e6-b850-10220ec14a5e
