On 22/04/2022 07:30, Neil Bowers wrote:
I’d hold fire on doing anything for a couple of days – there has been an
extra-time objection to my taint change, which may result in it being
reverted.
I’ll update you here once it’s resolved either way.
I thought that objection was just about how the user is asked about it
when configuring interactively. But in any case, I have another
potential minor objection - but whether it's a p5p thing or a
CPAN::Reporter thing I don't know:
$ ./blead Tie::Scalar::Decay
...
CPAN::Reporter: Test result is 'pass', 'make test' no errors.
CPAN::Reporter: preparing a CPAN Testers report for Tie-Scalar-Decay-1.1.1
CPAN::Reporter: sending test report with 'pass' via Metabase
...
$ ./blead-no-taint Tie::Scalar::Decay
...
CPAN::Reporter: Test result is 'pass', 'make test' no errors.
CPAN::Reporter: preparing a CPAN Testers report for Tie-Scalar-Decay-1.1.1
CPAN::Reporter: this appears to be a duplicate report for the test phase:
...
Note that CPAN::Reporter can't tell from what's in its list of
previously sent reports that this is a different perl built with
different options. Building with and without -Utaint_support makes no
difference to `archname`, which is what CPAN::Reporter uses to tell the
difference between eg threaded and non-threaded, or normal float vs
longdouble vs quadmath builds.
I'm not sure whether this difference should show up in archname or not,
but if it shouldn't then CPAN::Reporter will need an update so it can
dig it out of Config.pm. It appears to only exist in config_args.
--
David Cantrell
