On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Eric Hodel <drbr...@segment7.net> wrote: > On Apr 8, 2009, at 07:10, Berger, Daniel wrote: >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: rubygems-developers-boun...@rubyforge.org >>> [mailto:rubygems-developers-boun...@rubyforge.org] On Behalf >>> Of Eric Hodel >>> Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 9:23 PM >>> To: RubyGems developers mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [Rubygems-developers] Revision 2154 Results on >>> Windows (mingw32and mswin32) >>> >>> >>> On Apr 6, 2009, at 20:54, Luis Lavena wrote: >>> >>>> The Following are the pasties containing different versions of Ruby >>>> 1.8.6 (from p114 to p368 silently released last week). >>>> >>>> mingw32: >>>> http://pastie.org/439209 >>> >>> There have been some changes to optparse, I see the >>> test_add_option_overlapping_common_and_local_options failure with: >>> >>> ruby 1.8.8dev (2009-04-06 revision 23143) [i386-darwin9.6.0] >>> >>> and see some diffs from apple ruby (1.8.6) too. >> >> Oh, for the love of... >> >> So, now're we're going to start having to check the version of Ruby, even >> within the 1.8.x branch? Or is there a more generic approach we can take? > > The test seemed to have been determining that optparse behaved a certain way > if it was used it wrong (specifying the same option twice). I decided to > just remove the test.
So was bogus? That make me feel better :-D -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
