On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 03:13:14PM -0700, Jonathan Swartz wrote:
> >But really the simplest thing is to get into the habit of running
> >tests from the source directory and no where else.
> Ok, fair enough. :) I didn't know whether I could legitimately make
> that assumption for all the automa
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 01:25:14PM -0700, Jonathan Swartz wrote:
> Ok. Thanks for the mention of Devel::Hide. There is also
> Test::Without::Module and Module::Mask, which all look pretty similar.
>
> But I still have two problems with using any of these directly:
> 1) I have to specify exactly
Jonathan Swartz wrote:
2) I have to compute the right exception paths. Doing "use lib
qw(blib/lib blib/arch)" as you suggest would only work if the tests
were
run from the main directory. e.g. If I'm in the t/ directory and do
"perl -I../lib foo.t", as I do sometimes, it ought to work as well.
Jonathan Swartz wrote:
> 2) I have to compute the right exception paths. Doing "use lib
> qw(blib/lib blib/arch)" as you suggest would only work if the tests were
> run from the main directory. e.g. If I'm in the t/ directory and do
> "perl -I../lib foo.t", as I do sometimes, it ought to work as we
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 12:15:38PM -0400, David Golden wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:05 PM, David Cantrell > wrote:
That's true, but this isn't just about testing libs - it's any
lib I
might delete from the distribution.
You want Devel::Hide.
I think the original question was about catchin
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 12:15:38PM -0400, David Golden wrote:
> On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:05 PM, David Cantrell wrote:
> >> That's true, but this isn't just about testing libs - it's any lib I
> >> might delete from the distribution.
> > You want Devel::Hide.
> I think the original question was ab
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:05 PM, David Cantrell wrote:
>> That's true, but this isn't just about testing libs - it's any lib I
>> might delete from the distribution.
>
> You want Devel::Hide.
I think the original question was about catching a module deleted by
mistake -- otherwise, Devel::Hide ro
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 08:44:00AM -0700, Jonathan Swartz wrote:
> From: Michael Peters
> > Jonathan Swartz wrote:
> > > In the latest version I deleted a necessary module, CHI/t/Multilevel.pm,
> > > from the distribution, but "make test" still succeeded because
> > > CHI/t/Multilevel.pm was ins
That's true, but this isn't just about testing libs - it's any lib I might
delete from the distribution.
-Original Message-
From: Michael Peters
Date: Wednesday, May 6, 2009 6:22 am
Subject: Re: masking installed versions when running tests
To: Jonathan Swartz
CC: per
Jonathan Swartz wrote:
In the latest version I deleted a necessary module, CHI/t/Multilevel.pm,
from the distribution, but "make test" still succeeded because
CHI/t/Multilevel.pm was installed in /usr/local.
You could also put your testing libs in t/lib instead of CHI/t that way they are
nev
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Jonathan Swartz wrote:
> One solution, I guess, is to use a fresh install of Perl that contains just
> the requirements for CHI. But I'd need one of these for each CPAN
> distribution I'm working on!
You only need one fresh perl. Set CPAN not to install build_requ
11 matches
Mail list logo
