On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 10:52:12AM -0400, David Golden wrote: > On 9/26/06, Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Err, thanks. But there's almost no information about the problem. > > I'm CC'ing this to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to ask if anyone knows > why it said "Detailed output could not be captured with test.pl and > make." > > This is a limitation in the current version of CPAN::Reporter. > > My understanding is that ExtUtils::MakeMaker creates a Makefile > that executes test.pl directly and uses the result code to > determine success or failure. It does not pass test.pl to > Test::Harness, so CPAN::Reporter can't reliably parse for success. > (And it gets run right after all tests from t/*.t). > > As a result, I can't tee the output of test.pl as that obscures the > exit code. I can't just capture without teeing or there would be > no visible output, no way to respond to prompts and no way to know > if the test has hung. So when test.pl exists and "make test" is > the command from CPAN.pm, CPAN::Reporter punts. [...]
So the simple existence of a test.pl file prevents CPAN::Reporter capturing the output of the t/*.t tests? > I'll grant it needs a better diagnostic. True :) > Andreas has suggested running "make test" again on failure, the > second time with output captured. I haven't gotten around to > implementing it -- and I'm not sure if I want to do so without > adding a prompt and having an option to turn it off. In part, I > was waiting to see if it would be even be a problem -- I don't > think many distros still use test.pl. > > Well, DBI is important enough for it to be a problem. > > test.pl is flagged as being "mostly an empty shell". Can it be > removed entirely or moved to the examples directory? I'll rename it for the next release. It's not very useful these days. > Or do I need to prioritize getting some sort of output capture even > in the case of test.pl? In this case, since t/*.t is run as well, > the Test::Harness "All tests successful" line would get picked up > and the the results of test.pl would be ignored. That seems like the best approach. Make won't run test.pl is any of the t/*.t tests failed. So if you know that none failed but make failed then you'll know it was test.pl that failed. Thanks for your work on this David. Tim. > Regards, > David Golden > > References > > Visible links > 1. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > 2. mailto:[email protected]
