https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=8227
--- Comment #5 from Sidney Markowitz <sid...@sidney.com> --- I have more information from a test build I uploaded to CPAN to see what their test machines make of it. The results are a bit confusing. What I uploaded is what is in trunk now, which will not generate any report from a test machine that fails the DNS test in Makefile.PL. Despite that, there are a number of failures reported anyway, although from the lower numbers I think that most test machines with problems are failing fast and silently. There are three failures, on the same FreeBSD 10.1 test machine with three runs each using different versions of perl, getting identical failures. They fail t/dnsplatform.t, getting 0 answers to the query of multihomed.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org A even though the identical test in Makefile.PL has to have passed for the build to continue on to run the tests. They also all have the same failures in t/dnsbl.t and t/spamc_H.t I can't do any testing on a FreeBSD 10.1 VM because I can't find any FreeBSD archives that go back that far, other than the basic install images. Another three failures are on a Windows 10 test machine, again three runs with different versions of perl. Those all have failures in t/dnsbl.t, t/hashbl.t, and t/spf.t, but the specific tests that fail are different. I suspect that there are replies being lost randomly. I haven't yet seen any other tests of this upload on Windows machines, and I can't reproduce the problem on my Windows 10 VM. Given that this test is not definitively predictive of the failures, and especially because I can't see why we should care about failures in FreeBSD 10.1, I'll revert all the changes I committed except to keep to new t/dnsplatform.t which is still useful to alert one to a badly configured DNS setup that should either be fixed or require use of the dns_server option. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
