On Tue May 12 05:18:47 2009, jk...@verizon.net wrote:
Here's an update based on a recent Smolder report
Thanks to a steady stream of Smolder reports from 'sm...@pc42.my.domain'
-- I don't know who the human there is -- performed on OpenBSD/amd64, we
can see that we are passing all non-SKIPped
Here's an update based on a recent Smolder report
(http://smolder.plusthree.com/app/public_projects/report_details/21469);
veracity.t: passing
arithmetics.t:
ok 7 - negate -0.0 # TODO -0.0 not implemented, TT #313 : still not passing
(Why is this showing up yellow rather than green on the
James Keenan via RT wrote:
arithmetics.t:
ok 7 - negate -0.0 # TODO -0.0 not implemented, TT #313 : still not passing
(Why is this showing up yellow rather than green on the Smolder report
if it is 'ok'?)
Because it's a TODO test. TODO tests aren't counted in the passing total whether
they
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008, chromatic wrote:
On Monday 03 November 2008 09:38:11 Andy Dougherty wrote:
3. 1 of the tests appears to fail depending on how the OS initial-
cases 'Inf'. Again, could this be addressed in a hints file?
This too is a long-standing problem: See [perl #19183].
On Monday 03 November 2008 09:38:11 Andy Dougherty wrote:
3. 1 of the tests appears to fail depending on how the OS initial-
cases 'Inf'. Again, could this be addressed in a hints file?
This too is a long-standing problem: See [perl #19183]. It stalled
pending a decision on whether or
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 01:03:47PM -0500, Andy Dougherty wrote:
On Sat, 8 Nov 2008, chromatic wrote:
+if (fabsl(ld) == 0.0 Parrot_signbit(ld))
+info.flags |= FLAG_MINUS;
+
(I'm not sure how portable fabsl() is either, though
On Sat, 8 Nov 2008, chromatic wrote:
On Monday 03 November 2008 09:38:11 Andy Dougherty wrote:
I wonder if this patch fixes things. Certainly it does no harm on my box.
Parrot_signbit() already exists in the platform files, so we might as well
use it.
--- src/spf_render.c (revision
On Sun, 2 Nov 2008, James Keenan wrote:
# New Ticket Created by James Keenan
# Please include the string: [perl #60312]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=60312
Thanks to some automated test
On Mon Nov 03 09:38:38 2008, doughera wrote:
On Sun, 2 Nov 2008, James Keenan wrote:
Observations:
1. All 6 of these tests are marked to be skipped on Win32. So
perhaps the reason they're failing on OpenBSD is the same as that for
Win32. If so, then we could add 'OpenBSD' to
I understand that some of the Parrot developers will be having a confab
at Google the weekend after this. Perhaps they could devote some time
to discussing the question of how we can recruit to the project some
people who are *really* knowledgeable about particular OSes, i.e.,
porters. I
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008, James Keenan via RT wrote:
Are the underlying machines and
perl5 configurations the same for the NetBSD and OpenBSD tests?
I believe so. I think magnachef has them set up as virtual machines on
the same underlying box. He's working on getting me accounts on them
# New Ticket Created by James Keenan
# Please include the string: [perl #60312]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=60312
Thanks to some automated test reporting setups (which I think are
still coming
12 matches
Mail list logo
