Martin:

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Martin J.
Evans<martin.ev...@easysoft.com> wrote:
> Jonathan Yu wrote:
>> Hi:
>>
>> I seek the wisdom of any other module authors that might have come
>> across this problem.
>>
>> Recently, I uploaded a new version of Math::Random::ISAAC::XS and ran
>> into a *lot* of regressions. I've looked at the diff and I didn't
>> really change all that much, except for removing some things from
>> Recommends. The smokers nonetheless output something that I can't
>> reproduce, and I'm not sure if it has to do with my use of the
>> 'version' pragma, or if the systems in question are using an older
>> version than I test with.
>>
>> In at least one report, the version seems to be recent, so I'm not
>> sure if it's a new issue:     version            0     0.76_06
>>
>> I get plenty of failing tests:
>> http://www.cpantesters.org/distro/M/Math-Random-ISAAC-XS.html#Math-Random-ISAAC-XS-1.0.6
>>
>> Here is the diff between my last (100% PASS) version, 1.05, and the
>> latest version, which has a lot more failures than I'd like:
>> http://search.cpan.org/diff?from=Math-Random-ISAAC-XS-1.0.5&to=Math-Random-ISAAC-XS-1.0.6
>>
>> Any insight that the module-authors can provide would be greatly
>> appreciated. Does this have to do with the latest version pragma?
>> Maybe I should also agree that it's considered a Bad Thing and move to
>> using the older, more Perlish version numbers :(
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>
> I think a new version of version.pm was made available a few days ago by
> David Golden (0.77). You fails results seem to mention if (0.77).
> Perhaps this is the cause. I've cc'ed David just in case (apologies if
> I'm off the mark on this David).

On further analysis I don't think version 0.77 is the culprit -- I've
installed that version inside a clean chroot and everything still
builds per normal. I'm not sure if it was something related to that
version somehow though.

I suppose part of the issue is that CPAN Smokers don't provide a full
build log, but only a report of the test part, so that might be
hampering the investigation.

And of course, until I can figure out how to reproduce the bug, I can't fix it
>
> Martin
>

Reply via email to