On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 02:26:22PM +0200, Marko Asplund wrote: > On Fri, 2004-02-06 at 15:00, Tim Bunce wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 11:33:54AM +0200, Marko Asplund wrote: > > > On Wed, 2004-02-04 at 21:08, Tim Bunce wrote: > > > > Try running the DBD::Oracle v1.12 t/long.t using DBD::Oracle v1.15 > > > > (I don't know if it'll work or not, I don't think anyone's tried that) > > > > > > t/long.t from DBD::Oracle v1.12 runs without errors with v1.15 driver. > > > tests number 195-198 fail in v1.15 t/long.t. > > > > So the tests have improved to catch this case. You could also try the > > other way. Run the v1.15 t/long.t with DBD::Oracle v1.12 (you'll have to > > disable/ignore some test for new features like the ora_lob_* functions). > > i disabled the LOB test block starting on line 278 in DBD::Oracle v1.15 > t/long.t. using DBD::Oracle v1.12 driver tests number 13, 106 and > 195-198 fail. with v1.15 driver tests 195-198 fail. > > > But whatever happens, I'm sure the problem is with Oracle. > > yes, i understand this but if possible it would be nice to not make the > user worry whether a test failure is an indication of a real problem or > not for example by skipping the test, outputting an informative message, > by listing expected test failures by product version or some other way.
I agree. Patches welcome. Tim.
