Re: Eliminating the core-test BEGIN block (was Re: [ken@mathforum.org: Re: [Inline 0.43] insecure dependency when tainting])

2002-09-03 Thread Nicholas Clark
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 03:56:14PM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote: While the result is still ugly, it means we can expand and alter the requirements for running a core test. For example, the PERL_CORE environment variable should be set (t/TestInit.pm currently doesn't). So the full command

Re: Eliminating the core-test BEGIN block (was Re: [ken@mathforum.org: Re: [Inline 0.43] insecure dependency when tainting])

2002-09-02 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 08:13:06AM +0100, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote: I understand all that. My point was that while test itself may care where it is run, blib.pm does not mind as much. Also blib.pm's job is to make running an un-installed module easy which is what you want to do for a

Re: Eliminating the core-test BEGIN block (was Re: [ken@mathforum.org: Re: [Inline 0.43] insecure dependency when tainting])

2002-09-02 Thread Ken Williams
On Tuesday, September 3, 2002, at 08:56 AM, Michael G Schwern wrote: On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 08:13:06AM +0100, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote: I understand all that. My point was that while test itself may care where it is run, blib.pm does not mind as much. Also blib.pm's job is to make running an

Re: Eliminating the core-test BEGIN block (was Re: [ken@mathforum.org: Re: [Inline 0.43] insecure dependency when tainting])

2002-09-02 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 11:26:01AM +1000, Ken Williams wrote: Thus is you need to be in t this might suit cd t; perl -Mblib=lib foo/bar.t I'd be happier if that 'cd t;' happened inside blib.pm as 'chdir t'. It already happens inside TestInit. I'd be happier still if tests didn't run

Re: Eliminating the core-test BEGIN block (was Re: [ken@mathforum.org: Re: [Inline 0.43] insecure dependency when tainting])

2002-09-02 Thread Ken Williams
On Tuesday, September 3, 2002, at 03:10 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote: On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 11:26:01AM +1000, Ken Williams wrote: Thus is you need to be in t this might suit cd t; perl -Mblib=lib foo/bar.t I'd be happier if that 'cd t;' happened inside blib.pm as 'chdir t'. It already

Re: Eliminating the core-test BEGIN block (was Re: [ken@mathforum.org: Re: [Inline 0.43] insecure dependency when tainting])

2002-09-02 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 03:34:39PM +1000, Ken Williams wrote: I thought the whole idea was to run blib.pm to set @INC. If the test suite is setting up @INC we don't need blib. blib.pm only adds to @INC. Seems like the core requires something to strip @INC down to a small set, not add

Eliminating the core-test BEGIN block (was Re: [ken@mathforum.org: Re: [Inline 0.43] insecure dependency when tainting])

2002-08-30 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 05:54:15PM +1000, Ken Williams wrote: Oh, one big lib/, not several different ones? So then why can't it be run with perl -Mblib=lib t/foo/bar.t ? Because tests all try to run from t/. That's what the chdir 't' is for. t/TEST does this for you and so do the

Eliminating the core-test BEGIN block (was Re: [ken@mathforum.org: Re: [Inline 0.43] insecure dependency when tainting])

2002-08-30 Thread Nick Ing-Simmons
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 05:54:15PM +1000, Ken Williams wrote: Oh, one big lib/, not several different ones? So then why can't it be run with perl -Mblib=lib t/foo/bar.t ? blib was invented to allow just such usage. Because tests all try to