Re: [HACKERS] collate.linux.utf8 test coverage

2015-04-27 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 9:28 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > The patch needed a little adjustment so it runs with the right switches in > the right branch, I think. See > Oops, yes. Updated as well... -- Mich

Re: [HACKERS] collate.linux.utf8 test coverage

2015-04-27 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 04/27/2015 02:39 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 11:36 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: The optional buildfarm module that runs this test was broken by commit dcae5faccab64776376d354decda0017c648bb53 Since nobody has res

Re: [HACKERS] collate.linux.utf8 test coverage

2015-04-26 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 11:36 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> The optional buildfarm module that runs this test was broken by commit >> dcae5faccab64776376d354decda0017c648bb53 >> >> Since nobody has responded to my complaint about this, I ha

Re: [HACKERS] collate.linux.utf8 test coverage

2015-04-25 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > The optional buildfarm module that runs this test was broken by commit > dcae5faccab64776376d354decda0017c648bb53 > > Since nobody has responded to my complaint about this, I have disabled it on > crake, the only buildfarm machine that has a