Joachim Wieland wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 01:15:56PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Can't comment on that one, since I just noticed it existed. How similar
>> was this one to the "standard regression tests"? Those were moved into a
>> C executable so they'd run on a Windows system without
Tom Lane wrote:
> Joachim Wieland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Attached patch enables the special expected files only for
>> "i386-unknown-openbsd3.8".
>
> This seems the wrong approach; we do not have anywhere near that good a
> handle on which platforms have this behavior. I'd vote for treati
> Attached is a patch to get guppy green again (hopefully).
>
> The two new files go into src/interfaces/ecpg/test/expected
Hi,
I just wanted to mention that the latest release of OpenBSD i386
(4.0) is still broken too. So the ecpg-check failure would apply to
(at least) to 3.8, 4.0, and likely
Joachim Wieland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Attached patch enables the special expected files only for
> "i386-unknown-openbsd3.8".
This seems the wrong approach; we do not have anywhere near that good a
handle on which platforms have this behavior. I'd vote for treating it
like a locale differ
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 01:20:15AM +0100, Joachim Wieland wrote:
> Attached is a patch to get guppy green again (hopefully).
Applied.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: [EMAIL PRO
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 10:09:34 +0100 Joachim Wieland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 09:29:36AM +0100, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> > >ok, but then we have some hosts in the buildfarm that run the updated
> > >versions like zebra and spoonbill. In this case we can't decide on th
Joachim Wieland wrote:
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 01:45:10AM +0100, Chris Mair wrote:
I just wanted to mention that the latest release of OpenBSD i386
(4.0) is still broken too. So the ecpg-check failure would apply to
(at least) to 3.8, 4.0, and likely 3.9.
ok, but then we have some hosts in the
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 01:45:10AM +0100, Chris Mair wrote:
> I just wanted to mention that the latest release of OpenBSD i386
> (4.0) is still broken too. So the ecpg-check failure would apply to
> (at least) to 3.8, 4.0, and likely 3.9.
ok, but then we have some hosts in the buildfarm that run t
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 01:15:56PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Can't comment on that one, since I just noticed it existed. How similar
> was this one to the "standard regression tests"? Those were moved into a
> C executable so they'd run on a Windows system without a shell, could
> the same be
Joachim Wieland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On guppy the ecpg checks trigger the OpenBSD bug that Michael and Stefan
> identfied here:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-09/msg00593.php
> Not sure what to do about it, we could diff it away to get it green but it
> would not solve
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 01:37:03PM +0100, Joachim Wieland wrote:
> Attached is a patch that adds a --regression option to ecpg. I replaced the
> manual checking for long options (--version and --help) by a call to
> ...
Applied. I also changed the regression handling in other places. Guys,
please
> It shuold be the same - 10061 is the win32 error code. 274D is just the
> hex version of the same one.
Okay, changed this. Please test if you have a MinGW setup.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: mic
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 10:49:59AM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 09:51:11AM +0100, Joachim Wieland wrote:
> > There are, see for example
> > ecpg/test/expected/compat_informix-dec_test-MinGW32.stdout
> >
> > AFAIK there were no other platforms except for MinGW that need sp
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 09:51:11AM +0100, Joachim Wieland wrote:
> There are, see for example
> ecpg/test/expected/compat_informix-dec_test-MinGW32.stdout
>
> AFAIK there were no other platforms except for MinGW that need special
> treatment.
Talking about MinGW, do all MinGW systems return:
Con
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 08:41:24AM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > While I'm whining ... we really need some support in the ecpg regression
> > tests for platform-specific diffs, so that the consistent ECPG-check
> > failures in buildfarm can go away.
> Hmm, I thought there was. Joachim, could yo
On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 11:50:10PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I think we need to hear from Michael wither that version number in the C
> file is needed.
It certainly is not for regression testing. However, I think it should
be there for production use so people know how they created those .c fi
On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 11:31:41PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> While I can't say whether Joachim's patch is the cleanest way, surely
> we will not condemn ourselves to fixing this manually in every future
> release cycle.
I couldn't agree more. The reason why I haven't committed Joachim's
patch yet i
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Joachim Wieland wrote:
>> Attached is a patch that adds a --regression option to ecpg.
> I have added a checklist item to update the ecpg regression output for
> major release bumps. I think that is the easiest solution at this
> point.
While I can't s
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Joachim Wieland wrote:
> >> Attached is a patch that adds a --regression option to ecpg.
>
> > I have added a checklist item to update the ecpg regression output for
> > major release bumps. I think that is the easiest solution at th
Joachim Wieland wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 05:55:45PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > The idea of having to do this at every version number bump is pretty
> > > unappetizing. Shouldn't we fix things so that the version number
> > > doesn't appear in the ecpg regression files?
>
> > It wou
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>> Stamp major release 8.3.0, and increment library version numbers.
> >>
> >> this commit broke the buildfarm(ECPG-checks):
> >> http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_status.
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> Stamp major release 8.3.0, and increment library version numbers.
>>
>> this commit broke the buildfarm(ECPG-checks):
>> http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_status.pl
> Thanks, fixed.
The idea
Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Log Message:
> > ---
> > Stamp major release 8.3.0, and increment library version numbers.
>
> this commit broke the buildfarm(ECPG-checks):
>
> http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_status.pl
Thanks, fixed.
--
Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Log Message:
> ---
> Stamp major release 8.3.0, and increment library version numbers.
this commit broke the buildfarm(ECPG-checks):
http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_status.pl
Stefan
---(end of broadcast)---
24 matches
Mail list logo
