Hi Merijn,
> On Tue 24 Feb 2004 12:52, "H.Merijn Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue 24 Feb 2004 11:09, "Gerrit P. Haase" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed
>> > >
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > ../ext/IPC/SysV/t/ipcsysv.t 1 256 16 32 200.00% 1-16
>> > > ../ext/IPC/SysV/t/msg.t 0 12 ?? ?? % ??
>> > > ../ext/IPC/SysV/t/sem.t 0 12 ?? ?? % ??
>> > > ../lib/ExtUtils/t/Install.t 0 139 ?? ?? % ??
>> > > ../lib/IPC/SysV.t 1 256 16 32 200.00% 1-16
>> > > op/sysio.t 39 1 2.56% 39
>> > > op/taint.t 0 12 223 148 66.37% 150-223
>> > > 50 tests and 514 subtests skipped.
>> > > Failed 7/872 test scripts, 99.20% okay. 107/80975 subtests failed, 99.87% okay.
>> >
>> >
>> > For IPC function without cygipc, the cygserver needs to run during the
>> > test runs.
>>
>> IIRC Yitzchak was about to change the test to skip the test if the server was
>> not running.
> Sorry for the speedy follow up
> On second though, how feasible is it to
> if (cygserver_running ()) {
> do_tests ();
> }
> elif (cygserver_installed ()) {
> start_cygserver ();
> do_tests ();
> stop_cygserver ();
> }
> else {
> skip_tests ();
> }
> or is this too much of a security risk?
Security? I think that is not a problem on a developer box.
Would be nice to have this auto-detect feature IMO.
Gerrit
--
=^..^=
