On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 7:55 AM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > So it isn't that it's "unexpected", it's that a dependency is missing. > So it seems the terminology needs to get tweaked.
More that the phrase "expected skip" isn't clearly defined and people sometimes guess wrong as to what it means. As Martin pointed out, there are two possible meanings: "will never work on this OS" and "won't work with just the base OS install". Currently, the "expected skip" list is based purely on the former, but developers occasionally interpret it as the latter (as Bill did in this case). I will note that the first list is much easier to keep up to date, since the latter may vary significantly based on vendor decisions as to what they install by default (a fairly significant factor in the Linux and *BSD worlds). Adding "(Were all optional modules built successfully?)" to the end of the "skips were unexpected" line in the regrtest output may be enough to eliminate the confusion. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
