Hi, On 2020-09-15 11:56:24 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 05:42:51PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > > My test uses IPC::Run - although I'm indirectly 'use'ing, which I guess > > isn't pretty. Just as 013_crash_restart.pl already did (even before > > psql/t/010_tab_completion.pl). I am mostly wondering whether we could > > avoid copying the utility functions into multiple test files... > > > > Does IO::Pty work on windows? Given that currently the test doesn't use > > a pty and that there's no benefit I can see in requiring one, I'm a bit > > hesitant to go there? > > Per https://metacpan.org/pod/IO::Tty: > "Windows is now supported, but ONLY under the Cygwin environment, see > http://sources.redhat.com/cygwin/." > > So I would suggest to make stuff a soft dependency (as Tom is > hinting?), and not worry about Windows specifically. It is not like > what we are dealing with here is specific to Windows anyway, so you > would have already sufficient coverage. I would not mind if any > refactoring is done later, once we know that the proposed test is > stable in the buildfarm as we would get a better image of what part of > the facility overlaps across multiple tests.
I'm confused - the test as posted should work on windows, and we already do this in an existing test (src/test/recovery/t/013_crash_restart.pl). What's the point in adding a platforms specific dependency here? Greetings, Andres Freund