Re: [HACKERS] error message diff with Perl 5.22.0
Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com writes: (What about the back branches? :D) Indeed. dangomushi is complaining about this in the back branches now. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] error message diff with Perl 5.22.0
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com writes: (What about the back branches? :D) Indeed. dangomushi is complaining about this in the back branches now. Yep, perl 5.22 is used there. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] error message diff with Perl 5.22.0
On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote: With the recently released Perl 5.22.0, the tests fail thus: -ERROR: Global symbol $global requires explicit package name at line 3. -Global symbol $other_global requires explicit package name at line 4. +ERROR: Global symbol $global requires explicit package name (did you forget to declare my $global?) at line 3. +Global symbol $other_global requires explicit package name (did you forget to declare my $other_global?) at line 4. CONTEXT: compilation of PL/Perl function uses_global FWIW the committed expected file seems fine to me. There is not a perl option to toggle this behavior (and even if there was, I think the resulting changes to pl/perl functions we be quite ugly). (What about the back branches? :D)
Re: [HACKERS] error message diff with Perl 5.22.0
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: With the recently released Perl 5.22.0, the tests fail thus: -ERROR: Global symbol $global requires explicit package name at line 3. -Global symbol $other_global requires explicit package name at line 4. +ERROR: Global symbol $global requires explicit package name (did you forget to declare my $global?) at line 3. +Global symbol $other_global requires explicit package name (did you forget to declare my $other_global?) at line 4. CONTEXT: compilation of PL/Perl function uses_global BTW, buildfarm member anchovy has started failing because of this. Could we get a fix in? I think the alternate expected file approach is fine. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] error message diff with Perl 5.22.0
Peter Eisentraut wrote: With the recently released Perl 5.22.0, the tests fail thus: -ERROR: Global symbol $global requires explicit package name at line 3. -Global symbol $other_global requires explicit package name at line 4. +ERROR: Global symbol $global requires explicit package name (did you forget to declare my $global?) at line 3. +Global symbol $other_global requires explicit package name (did you forget to declare my $other_global?) at line 4. CONTEXT: compilation of PL/Perl function uses_global With PL/Python, this happens for just about every other release, and we usually add another expected file. I don't see anything like that for PL/Perl yet. Should we add a new expected file, or is there a different preferred solution? How many .sql files does this affect? Alternate expected output is bothersome; if more than one test file is affected, I think the best is to isolate the cases where this appears to a single .sql file, as short as possible, so that we don't have to touch it for anything else, and so that we don't have to touch the isolated file except for similar changes. Also, do we need a buildfarm member running 5.22? -- Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] error message diff with Perl 5.22.0
Alvaro Herrera wrote: Also, do we need a buildfarm member running 5.22? Actually, I wonder if there's a way to have a buildfarm animal that runs the pl/perl tests with all supported versions of Perl, for example. This would probably require adding a new .pm file each time a new Perl is released. Is this doable? -- Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
