On Sunday, September 25, 2011 11:27:21 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > On Sunday, September 25, 2011 23:14:37 Brad Roberts wrote: >> The freebsd/32 box is running 8.1-RELEASE. The /usr/share/zoneinfo has >> a predictable set of files in it all dated Jul 19, 2010. The >> FreeBSD/64 box is 8.2 and the files are dated Feb 16, 2011. Define >> "not up to date". >> >> I can create you an account on either or both if you want. > > Well, Chile has been messing around with their DST on a yearly basis for the > last two or three years, and it appears that whenever the files were updated > for this year's DST switches, it was too recent for either version > 8.1-RELEASE > of FreeBSD or version 8.2 of FreeBSD, given that std.datetime's tests are > failing for America/Santiago on both when testing the DST switches of this > year. So, either the time zone packages on those machine need to be updated > (which may or may not be reasonable - I've never used any of the BSDs, so I > don't know), or I'm going to have to figure out how to redo the tests so that > they work with the time zone files which are on those machines (which may or > may not be easy, given that the main problem with picking valid DST tests is > that Windows has the DST switches wrong something like 90% of the time). > > So, ideally, the time zone files on those boxes would be updated, but if > that's > not reasonable, I'm going to have to figure out how to rework the DST unit > tests. > > - Jonathan M Davis
Frankly, if the tests are that sensitive, the problem is the tests. A Joe Random downloader of the source should be able to expect the code to compile and past tests on a reasonably modern os. I'd argue that 8.x is modern enough (more so given that last I checked, 8.2 was the most recent 8.x release). The job of the unit tests is to test the code, not how up to date the distribution is. _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
