Testing...
--
Will Coke Coleda
On Mon Sep 21 15:28:01 2009, jk...@verizon.net wrote:
So, unless there is some strong objection, I will close this ticket
within 7 days.
No one spoke up for this; rejecting ticket.
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
There's been a lot of water under the bridge since this test failure
report was originally filed. So we would undoubtedly need new reports
to go forward.
I'm going to close this ticket and encourage people with access to
NexentaOS (GNU/OpenSolaris) to configure and build Parrot from HEAD
Although I cannot be sure that the issues which were cited in the
original post to this RT have been cleared up, I note that there has
been no follow-up discussion in eight months.
So I'm going to resolve this ticket and encourage any new LANG-related
failures to be reported in new tickets in our
Testing...
--
Will Coke Coleda
on the Smolder report
if it is 'ok'?)
complex.t:
not ok 380 # TODO sinh of -2-3i
not ok 381 # TODO sinh of -2-3i
float.t:
not ok 23 - neg 0 # TODO -0.0 not implemented, TT #313
# Failed (TODO) test 'neg 0'
# at t/pmc/float.t line 512.
# '0'
# doesn't match '/^-0/
# '
So I would say
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
2009/3/22 Will Coleda via RT parrotbug-follo...@parrotcode.org:
On Sat Jan 31 17:51:51 2009, jk...@verizon.net wrote:
Thanks. Making that correction, I confirm that the OP's seg fault still
occurs:
$ cat seg.pir
.sub main :main
.include 'include/test_more.pir'
new $P0, 'Integer'
new
Could I ask that either the requestor or somebody else with an
appropriate system verify my results?
That one's so old I'd fogotten about it. I've been running tests over the
last 9 months, so I think we can consider that closed.
--
Email and shopping with the feelgood factor!
55% of
You can't use P0 as a register in PIR these days, you need $P0 instead.
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 7:22 PM, James Keenan via RT
parrotbug-follo...@parrotcode.org wrote:
Reviewing this RT today, I get a completely different problem:
$ cat seg.pir
.sub main :main
.include 'include/test_more.pir'
it's been failing for a while (until quite recently, iirc), but now it seems
ok.Just svn up'ed, and nmake'd test; no failures. I'll report any new
failures to trac, if necessary.
thanks for coming back to me.
Ticket can be closed.
kjs
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 12:11 AM, James Keenan via RT
# New Ticket Created by Alan Rocker
# Please include the string: [perl #62206]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=62206
Under Windows (XP Home) Strawberry Perl
Attached are STDERR output and the summary
Home) Strawberry Perl
Attached are STDERR output and the summary of STDOUT.
(I assume that failures with TODO attached are already reported.)
The two t/pmc/complex.t tests fixed with r35429.
The one
# Failed test 'I/O buffering'
# at t/pmc/io.t line 434.
I cannot reproduce.
Looks like
Will Coleda wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 7:09 PM, James Keenan via RT
parrotbug-follo...@parrotcode.org wrote:
Interestingly enough, we are also getting failures on these 4 test files
on the OpenBSD Smolder tester:
http://smolder.plusthree.com/app/public_projects/report_details/3135
James Keenan via RT wrote:
On Wed Jul 30 16:58:55 2008, jk...@verizon.net wrote:
t/op/arithmetics.t
t/pmc/complex.t
t/pmc/float.t
For the record, according to our Smolder reports for MSWin32, these 3
files have tests that are either still TODO-ed out or are failing
outright on some
147-+
rurban, can this =item be deleted?
$ grep -in -A2 -B2 aio config/init/hints/dec_osf.pm 28-
$libs .= ' -lpthread';
29-}
30:if ( $libs !~ /-laio/ ) {
31:$libs .= ' -laio';
32-}
33-$conf-data-set( libs = $libs );
Jarkko, are you available
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 23:03:17 -0800, Parrot via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
t/op/callingNOK 73/98
git bisect blames https://svn.perl.org/parrot/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
andreas
-multi
cc= cc
---
Flags:
category=core
severity=medium
ack=no
---
This is with SVN rev 33589.
t/op/callingNOK 73/98
# Failed test ' 'foo' = d syntax for parameters'
# at t/op/calling.t line 1943.
# Exited with error code: 1
# Received
On win32, XP, I get the following test failure, with output:
t/pmc/eval..ok 1/17
t/pmc/eval..NOK 10/17# Failed test
'eval.get_string - same file'
# at t/pmc/eval.t line 319.
# Exited with error code: 1
# Received:
# hello from
# New Ticket Created by Klaas-Jan Stol
# Please include the string: [perl #60940]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=60940
On win32, XP, the test t/dynpmc/foo.t fails, wiht the output:
t/dynpmc/dynlexpad
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 10:41 PM, James Keenan via RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed Sep 10 19:48:04 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can someone evaluate where we stand with respect to the issues in this RT?
Thank you very much.
kid51
Still hoping for feedback on these issues.
Several
.: 'parrot;PCRE;init' pc 99 (library/pcre.pir:111)
called from Sub 'parrot;PCRE;main' pc 215 (examples/library/pcre.pir:39)
not ok 3 - examples/library/pcre.pir
not ok 4 - ncurses_life.pir # TODO ncurses_life.pir not testable yet
# Failed (TODO) test 'ncurses_life.pir'
# at t/examples/library.t line 77
On Thu Oct 25 08:18:13 2007, pcoch wrote:
In t/perl/Parrot_Test.t there is the todo item:
# TODO test run_command()
Do this please :-)
Since RT 46893 calls for testing Parrot::Test in general, I'm going to
merge this ticket into that one.
kid51
On Thu Oct 25 08:20:10 2007, pcoch wrote:
In t/perl/Parrot_Test.t there are the todo item comments:
# TODO test write_code_to_file(), plan(), skip(), slurp_file()
# test the test functions from Parrot::Test
# TODO: test the untested test functions
This is all (realistically speaking
Test continues to pass, so I'm resolving ticket.
No complaints since July, so I'm closing the ticket.
We should continue to do these build fests -- invite me to your .pm
meeting and I'll lead the fest -- but we don't need to keep an RT open
to do it. So I'm resolving this ticket. Some issues discovered at
individual build fests remain open, but they have their own RTs.
Thank you very much.
On Wed Oct 22 12:52:39 2008, masak wrote:
Just wanted to note that the reported problem does not occur for me
anymore. In fact, I don't see the file t/examples/library.t among the
tested files in the `make test` output. Neither does grep.
Unfortunately, all that demonstrates is that we changed
This appears to be the same issue as reported in RT 59112, so I am going
to merge this ticket into that.
kid51
On Wed Sep 10 19:48:04 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can someone evaluate where we stand with respect to the issues in this RT?
Thank you very much.
kid51
Still hoping for feedback on these issues.
Why is this test labelled [Perl] rather than [PIR]?
in any language, which probably have different ways of
classifying a test as TODO.
My count tonight is that 1384 .t files in the distribution. Of these
524 are *not* found under ./languages/.
I wonder if we could formulate the specification in this ticket a bit
more precisely before
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 7:16 AM, James Keenan via RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. I've heard a lot of talk lately about languages moving into their
own repositories. If so, then we have to ask whether we should be
instituting new coding standards for .t files under ./languages/. At
what
can be
written in any language, which probably have different ways of
classifying a test as TODO.
My count tonight is that 1384 .t files in the distribution. Of these
524 are *not* found under ./languages/.
I wonder if we could formulate the specification in this ticket a bit
more precisely
# New Ticket Created by Mark Glines
# Please include the string: [perl #60642]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=60642
Tonight, for the first time in four weeks, this test (#6) passed on
Darwin/PPC. Cf.:
http://smolder.plusthree.com/app/public_projects/tap_stream/8270/260
I can't really tell which commit fixed this failure. Given the fact
that several files with 'pack' in their names were changed in r32888
a test as TODO.
My count tonight is that 1384 .t files in the distribution. Of these
524 are *not* found under ./languages/.
I wonder if we could formulate the specification in this ticket a bit
more precisely before someone embarks on coding.
Yes, absolutely. I just added the basic ticket
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #60634]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=60634
This patch cleans up a few test files left in /tmp by the test suite.
diff -r -u
chromatic wrote:
On Tuesday 28 October 2008 20:07:18 James Keenan via RT wrote:
Still failing as of r32225; cf
http://smolder.plusthree.com/app/public_projects/tap_stream/7437/260
not ok 6 - set_integer_keyed_str
# Failed test 'set_integer_keyed_str'
# at t/pmc/packfile.t line 140
# Failed test 'set_integer_keyed_str'
# at t/pmc/packfile.t line 140.
# Exited with error code: [SIGNAL 11]
# Received:
#
# Expected:
# not equal
#
Can you post a backtrace?
-- c
Have been on vacation with poor net access, so I haven't been able to
respond to much.
I don't
On Sat Nov 08 00:06:50 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you post a backtrace?
Attached.
backtrace.packfile_6.pir
Description: Binary data
[oops, forgot to copy the list.]
If darwin has gdb, you can do the following to get a backtrace:
$ gdb parrot
gdb run t/pmc/packfile_6.pir
[segfault should occur here]
gdb bt
Mark
the underlying system does. At
lesat I don't remember ever writing any Configure tests to do otherwise,
and a quick look doesn't turn up anything obvious, and I don't think the
test suite specifically tests for it.
--
Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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 Tuesday 28 October 2008 20:07:18 James Keenan via RT wrote:
Still failing as of r32225; cf
http://smolder.plusthree.com/app/public_projects/tap_stream/7437/260
not ok 6 - set_integer_keyed_str
# Failed test 'set_integer_keyed_str'
# at t/pmc/packfile.t line 140.
# Exited with error
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
# New Ticket Created by Patrick R. Michaud
# Please include the string: [perl #60208]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=60208
'make test' in pheme is giving an error in r32229:
[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wednesday 29 October 2008 11:48:57 Patrick R. Michaud (via RT) wrote:
'make test' in pheme is giving an error in r32229:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/parrot/r32229/languages/pheme$ make test
../../parrot ../../compilers/tge/tgc.pir --output=lib/ASTGrammar.pir
lib/pge2past.tg ../../parrot
/home
On So. 07. Sep. 2008, 15:31:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This ticket has not been addressed since early July. Re-reading it now,
it seems to have two major discussion threads: one specific to
Test::Harness 3 and one relating more generally to the versions of CPAN
modules needed to configure
Still failing as of r32225; cf
http://smolder.plusthree.com/app/public_projects/tap_stream/7437/260
not ok 6 - set_integer_keyed_str
# Failed test 'set_integer_keyed_str'
# at t/pmc/packfile.t line 140.
# Exited with error code: [SIGNAL 11]
# Received:
#
# Expected:
# not equal
#
# New Ticket Created by James Keenan
# Please include the string: [perl #60068]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=60068
This is the only test failure I'm getting with version 0.8 on Darwin,
PPC, OS X
On Tue Jul 08 17:17:29 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
C:\Projects\parrotmingw32-make
Compiling with:--
SNIP
Can we get another copy of the report as a plain text attachment against
HEAD? (This one had a lot of HTML embedded in it.)
Thanks.
--
Will Coke Coleda
Nevermind.
Digging through the HTML output, the error was in one of the coding
standards tests, not one of the functional tests.
That particular codingstd nit has been resolved (and we're about to
switch over to not running those tests by default.)
Thanks for the report: Closing ticket.
On
# New Ticket Created by Allison Randal
# Please include the string: [perl #60020]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=60020
1) Remove the coding standards tests from the main 'make test' target.
2) Add
# New Ticket Created by Mark Grimes
# Please include the string: [perl #59968]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=59968
The following code results in a segfault:
.sub main :main
.include
On Mon Oct 13 07:31:30 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Christoph,
I send you the patch atached.
The script with TODO block works equal without it(with TODO
gives more information and adds the not yet implemented leyend).
Sincerely,
Igor
Hi Igor,
This patch looks good. There's no
://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=56018
Greetings,
tcl_misc.t is failing in languages/tcl.
# Failed test 'reading environment variables'
# in t/tcl_misc.t at line 209.
not ok 27 - reading environment variables
# got: 'env(PATH)=
/usr/bin:/bin
/Ticket/Display.html?id=56806
pynie's test suite fails with [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Test Summary Report
---
t/00-parrot/05-vars.t(Wstat: 256 Tests: 0 Failed: 0)
Non-zero exit status: 1
Parse errors: No plan found in TAP output
...
r28325 appears
On Monday 13 October 2008 12:23:23 Seneca Cunningham wrote:
Test 27 of t/op/arithmetics.t fails when parrot is built as a 32-bit
binary on Intel OS X 10.5 (64-bit builds pass the test).
MacBook-Pro:build-20081012-32 seneca$ prove -v t/op/arithmetics.t
t/op/arithmetics1..27
# Failed
--- El mié 8-oct-08, Christoph Otto [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
De:: Christoph Otto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: [perl #44457] [TODO] make sure files match test files for DYNPMCs
and DYNOPs etc
A: Igor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: miércoles, 8 octubre, 2008, 11:17 pm
[EMAIL
# New Ticket Created by Seneca Cunningham
# Please include the string: [perl #59874]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=59874
Test 27 of t/op/arithmetics.t fails when parrot is built as a 32-bit
binary
# New Ticket Created by Seneca Cunningham
# Please include the string: [perl #59876]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=59876
Test 2 of t/native_pbc/header.t passes 32-bit Intel OS X builds (10.5
[EMAIL PROTECTED] via RT wrote:
--- El mar 30-sep-08, Christoph Otto [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
De:: Christoph Otto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: [perl #44457] [TODO] make sure files match test files for DYNPMCs
and DYNOPs etc
A: Igor ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: martes
--- El mar 30-sep-08, Christoph Otto [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
De:: Christoph Otto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: [perl #44457] [TODO] make sure files match test files for DYNPMCs
and DYNOPs etc
A: Igor ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: martes, 30 septiembre, 2008, 5:49 am
Igor
Your point is very interesting. However, if you believe this issue
merits more extended discussion, I would recommend you open up a new RT
ticket, perhaps in the [RFC] category (or [RFP] or whatever it's called).
I would like to keep the discussion in *this* RT focused on the issues
Carl
Forgot to forward to list:
On Thu Oct 02 18:37:05 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed Oct 01 16:09:41 2008, julianalbo wrote:
I see a more generic problem. Several modules add lib links to the
parrot executable. Makes sense to link static libraries if that is the
intention, but is
On Tue Sep 30 16:48:32 2008, masak wrote:
James ():
Let's start with an elementary question: What does Configure.pl say
for
you at this step:
auto::pcre - Does your platform support pcre
auto::pcre - Does your platform support
pcreyes, 7.7.
//
on your OS?
The config test for pcre try to compile a test program. The pcre.pir
dynamically loads the pcre library. So if, for example, you have only
a static pcre lib, it will detect it but fails to use.
--
Salu2
So could this be a problem with PCRE 7.7, or how it installs on your OS?
The config test for pcre try to compile a test program. The pcre.pir
dynamically loads the pcre library. So if, for example, you have only
a static pcre lib, it will detect it but fails to use.
That makes sense. Can we
On Wed Oct 01 13:58:32 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 01 October 2008 13:43:37 NotFound wrote:
The config test for pcre try to compile a test program. The pcre.pir
dynamically loads the pcre library. So if, for example, you have only
a static pcre lib, it will detect
The config test for pcre try to compile a test program. The pcre.pir
dynamically loads the pcre library. So if, for example, you have only
a static pcre lib, it will detect it but fails to use.
That makes sense. Can we change the config test to link against a
dynamic
pcre?
Patches
James ():
Let's start with an elementary question: What does Configure.pl say for
you at this step:
auto::pcre - Does your platform support pcre
auto::pcre - Does your platform support pcreyes, 7.7.
// Carl
;PCRE;main' pc 279 (examples/library/pcre.pir:39)
not ok 3 - examples/library/pcre.pir
# Failed test 'examples/library/pcre.pir'
# at t/examples/library.t line 67.
# got: ''
# expected: 'asdf =~ /as/
# 1 match(es):
# as
# '
Let's start with an elementary question: What does
it a more appropriate name once the
rest of the test works.
A good rule is to try to use as little code as possible to get the job done.
This doesn't mean that you should use weird one-liners that nobody can
understand, but that you should strive to write simple, easily understood
code. Line 88
--- El vie 12-sep-08, Rafael Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
De:: Rafael Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: [perl #44457] [TODO] make sure files match test files for DYNPMCs
and DYNOPs etc
A: Christoph Otto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: viernes, 12 septiembre, 2008, 2:49
/getopt_demo.pir
ok 2 - examples/library/md5sum.pir
7.7
Failed to load libpcre
current instr.: 'parrot;PCRE;init' pc 110 (library/pcre.pir:111)
called from Sub 'parrot;PCRE;main' pc 279 (examples/library/pcre.pir:39)
not ok 3 - examples/library/pcre.pir
# Failed test 'examples/library/pcre.pir'
# at t
Rejected, as we're deleting the file proposed for expansion.
Rejected, as we're deleting this file.
,
left argument in overloaded package File::Temp,
right argument has no overloaded magic at lib/Parrot/Test.pm
line 312.
# Looks like your test died before it could output anything.
Fix in the test:
my $out_f = File::Temp-new( UNLINK = 1, SUFFIX = '.pbc' );
...
Parrot::Test
--- El vie 12-sep-08, Christoph Otto [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
De:: Christoph Otto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: [perl #44457] [TODO] make sure files match test files for DYNPMCs
and DYNOPs etc
A: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: viernes, 12 septiembre, 2008, 6:56 am
[EMAIL
On our Smolder site, we're getting test results on FreeBSD (or, at
least, i386-freebsd-64int) approximately every 70 minutes.
Is there any reason to keep this ticket open?
Thank you very much.
kid51
On Fri Sep 12 20:24:06 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On our Smolder site, we're getting test results on FreeBSD (or, at
least, i386-freebsd-64int) approximately every 70 minutes.
Is there any reason to keep this ticket open?
E ... we *were* getting hourly reports on FreeBSD up thru
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 10:51 PM, James Keenan via RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Coke, particle: Where do we stand on this ticket?
thank you very much.
kid51
I haven't touched a win32 build of parrot in some months now, msvc or
otherwise. Smolder is probably a better place to look for
place to look for information
at this point.
Do we have anyone in the audience building on these tools that can
give us a more up to date answer?
I haven't seen this using Visual C++ 9.0. I'll also run a test with
6.0, 7.1 and 8.0. Is it okay if I close this ticket if nothing special
shows
On Thu Sep 11 14:28:08 2008, rblasch wrote:
I haven't seen this using Visual C++ 9.0. I'll also run a test with
6.0, 7.1 and 8.0. Is it okay if I close this ticket if nothing special
shows up?
Absolutely!
On Mon Aug 06 06:08:54 2007, pcoch wrote:
In the file t/distro/test_file_coverage.t there is the todo item:
# TODO: DYNPMC, DYNOPS, etc
This is in the context of making sure that the files match the test
files. This needs to be implemented.
Is this as simple as writing a test to make
is in the second attachment.
auto::aio - Does your platform support AIO...
/usr/bin/gcc [-options ... ] -I./include -c test_19186.c
c++ -undefined dynamic_lookup test_19186.o -o test_19186 -lm -lrt
/usr/bin/ld: can't locate file for: -lrt
That's another easy one. The test assumes
# from Will Coleda
# on Monday 28 July 2008 07:31:
I presume Eric noticed this as he was working on his patch to enable a
parallel make test; Now that his patch is applied, fixing these tests
should have a higher priority; If two tests that are trying to
create/use the same directory run
On Wed Sep 10 09:30:37 2008, doughera wrote:
That's another easy one. The test assumes that all platforms have -lrt
and that all platforms have to link with it for this test. Your system
clearly doesn't have -lrt, so the link fails. If you just delete the
line
that adds in -lrt, I'll
Can someone evaluate where we stand with respect to the issues in this RT?
Thank you very much.
kid51
Clark,
We're now at Parrot 0.7. Are you still getting these test failures with
that version (or with HEAD from svn)?
Can anyone else reproduce these errors?
Thank you very much.
kid51
Coke, particle: Where do we stand on this ticket?
thank you very much.
kid51
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, James Keenan via RT wrote:
On Wed Sep 10 09:30:37 2008, doughera wrote:
That's another easy one. The test assumes that all platforms have -lrt
and that all platforms have to link with it for this test. Your system
clearly doesn't have -lrt, so the link fails
1 - 100 of 1570 matches
Mail list logo
