From: David Oswald
Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2014 5:08 AM
If there's anyone on the Inline list who is able to replicate the failure,
I would really appreciate your feedback and hopefully insight.
I can't reproduce the failure - I suspect you need a smoker for that.
Andreas Koenig runs most (if not all) of those 3.10-3-amd64 boxes - some of
which PASS, others of which FAIL.
Maybe ask *him* what accounts for the difference. (He generally responds -
though not always immediately.)
Specifically, I would give him the example that the following is a FAIL:
5.18.2 Linux 3.10-3-amd64 x86_64-linux-thread-multi-ld
osname=linux, osvers=3.12-1-amd64, archname=x86_64-linux-thread-multi-ld
uname='linux k83 3.12-1-amd64 #1 smp debian 3.12.6-2 (2013-12-29) x86_64
gnulinux '
at:
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/dccb2306-8b09-11e3-a1d3-12675d7e0655
yet the following is a PASS:
5.18.1 Linux 3.10-3-amd64 x86_64-linux-thread-multi-ld
osname=linux, osvers=3.12-1-amd64, archname=x86_64-linux-thread-multi-ld
uname='linux k83 3.12-1-amd64 #1 smp debian 3.12.6-2 (2013-12-29) x86_64
gnulinux '
at:
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/acdd5866-8b0a-11e3-9551-ff515d7e0655
Both reports come from Andreas, and both report the same version of gcc (ie
4.8.2).
Both reports quote the same osname.
Both reports quote the same archname.
Both reports quote the same uname.
How does he account for the discrepancy in results ?
The only difference I can see is in the version of perl itself - 5.18.1 for
the PASS, and 5.18.2 for the FAIL. (Hard to believe that accounts for the
different result.)
Cheers,
Rob
