Stas Bekman wrote:
David Wheeler wrote:
On Apr 18, 2005, at 9:53 AM, Stas Bekman wrote:
As I've mentioned t/SMOKE is usually run after t/TEST fails, so it
has always relied on the fact that 'make test' was already run and
therefore didn't require to run its own setup.
Should `make smoke` rely on
On Apr 18, 2005, at 7:23 PM, Stas Bekman wrote:
% make smoke
make: *** No rule to make target `smoke'. Stop.
But if you wish to make it so, I've no objections :)
No, I have no interest in smoke (thank god!).
Cheers,
David
David Wheeler wrote:
On Apr 18, 2005, at 9:53 AM, Stas Bekman wrote:
As I've mentioned t/SMOKE is usually run after t/TEST fails, so it has
always relied on the fact that 'make test' was already run and
therefore didn't require to run its own setup.
Should `make smoke` rely on `make test`, then?
On Apr 18, 2005, at 9:53 AM, Stas Bekman wrote:
As I've mentioned t/SMOKE is usually run after t/TEST fails, so it has
always relied on the fact that 'make test' was already run and
therefore didn't require to run its own setup.
Should `make smoke` rely on `make test`, then?
Regards,
David
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
When you see Perl in the class name, it really means ModPerl-specific.
i.e. it's a subclass that *requires* mod_perl and needed to be be able
to run under mod_perl.
And maybe that's my issue.
After looking at it again, I get the feeling that t/SMOKE
Stas Bekman wrote:
When you see Perl in the class name, it really means ModPerl-specific.
i.e. it's a subclass that *requires* mod_perl and needed to be be able
to run under mod_perl.
And maybe that's my issue.
After looking at it again, I get the feeling that t/SMOKE for an A-T
dist using mod_
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Assuming it's the right thing to do, adding the mod_perl config stuff
into TestSmokePerl from TestRunPerl shouldn't be too difficult.
I'm afraid of breaking anything that uses TestSmokePerl, but it
doesn't appear like much, if anything does?
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
So According to
http://perl.apache.org/docs/general/testing/testing.html#C_Apache__TestSmoke__Solution
The sample t/SMOKE.PL files is:
#file:t/SMOKE.PL
#---
#!perl
use strict;
use warnings FATAL => 'all';
use FindBin;
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Assuming it's the right thing to do, adding the mod_perl config stuff
into TestSmokePerl from TestRunPerl shouldn't be too difficult.
I'm afraid of breaking anything that uses TestSmokePerl, but it doesn't
appear like much, if anything does?
-=Chris
Is there any reaso
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
So According to
http://perl.apache.org/docs/general/testing/testing.html#C_Apache__TestSmoke__Solution
The sample t/SMOKE.PL files is:
#file:t/SMOKE.PL
#---
#!perl
use strict;
use warnings FATAL => 'all';
use FindBin;
use lib "$FindBin::Bin/..
Stas Bekman wrote:
Thanks for the explaination, Chris. It's clear now.
As I've mentioned t/SMOKE is usually run after t/TEST fails, so it has
always relied on the fact that 'make test' was already run and therefore
didn't require to run its own setup.
Patches to make it independent are very welc
Stas Bekman wrote:
For that matter, why does t/TEST use TestRunPerl while t/SMOKE uses
TestSmoke? I would've expected TestSmokePerl [no knowing yet the
difference between the two].
Apache::TestRunPerl is a subclass of Apache::TestPerl, which overrides
some method.
SMOKE generated by mod_perl/E
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
I meant, that I don't understand why do you get stuck at t/SMOKE? Are
you trying to use it and it's not working? Or is it the TestMB that
tries to create it and fails the whole thing, when you don't even want
t/SMOKE? You really need t/TEST for the t
Stas Bekman wrote:
I meant, that I don't understand why do you get stuck at t/SMOKE? Are
you trying to use it and it's not working? Or is it the TestMB that
tries to create it and fails the whole thing, when you don't even want
t/SMOKE? You really need t/TEST for the test suite. t/SMOKE is for
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
I've CC'ed David, who developed Apache::TestMB, so he will hopefully
be able to give you the answers.
David, please take a look at this thread. I can't give you the link,
since I don't think this new list
Stas Bekman wrote:
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
I've CC'ed David, who developed Apache::TestMB, so he will hopefully
be able to give you the answers.
David, please take a look at this thread. I can't give you the link,
since I don't think this new list is archived at all. Are yo
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
I've CC'ed David, who developed Apache::TestMB, so he will hopefully
be able to give you the answers.
David, please take a look at this thread. I can't give you the link,
since I don't think this new list is archived at all. Are you
subscribed to it
Stas Bekman wrote:
I've CC'ed David, who developed Apache::TestMB, so he will hopefully be
able to give you the answers.
David, please take a look at this thread. I can't give you the link,
since I don't think this new list is archived at all. Are you subscribed
to it at all?
Thanks for the fo
I've CC'ed David, who developed Apache::TestMB, so he will hopefully be
able to give you the answers.
David, please take a look at this thread. I can't give you the link, since
I don't think this new list is archived at all. Are you subscribed to it
at all?
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Christoph
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
So, apparently it's trying to run the last script created via
generate_script instead of always running t/TEST.
-=Chris
And the offending part of the code ffrom TestMB.pm:
my $script = $self->localize_file_path($_[0]
? $self->apache_test_script(shift)
William McKee wrote:
I'm just spouting thoughts hoping it rings someone elses bell... sorry.
This reminds me of a discussion that took place recently on the MB
mailing list[1]. I wonder what would happen if you leave SMOKE.PL but
comment out all the code. Do the die statements get called? Perhaps
> I'm just spouting thoughts hoping it rings someone elses bell... sorry.
This reminds me of a discussion that took place recently on the MB
mailing list[1]. I wonder what would happen if you leave SMOKE.PL but
comment out all the code. Do the die statements get called? Perhaps
something in that c
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Great...two problems in one.
I was not seeing my dies because even though my Build.PL has:
$build->generate_script('t/TEST');
$build->generate_script('t/SMOKE');
The output from perl Build test is:
C:\Development\CPAN\Handel>perl Build test -verbose
C:\Development\Perl\5
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Right, it must be run at test time.
I've worked my way though all of the custom_config_loads and
custom_config_exists I can find, and die-ing before any of them doesn't
make perl Build test die. :-(
This is a tough one...
Great...two problems in one.
I was not seeing
Stas Bekman wrote:
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
Chris, grep for custom_config_load() which loads that data. and see
why Build doesn't pick it up.
Found it. Should that be called during a test run, or just during the
build?
IF I slap a die right inside
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
Chris, grep for custom_config_load() which loads that data. and see
why Build doesn't pick it up.
Found it. Should that be called during a test run, or just during the
build?
IF I slap a die right inside or custom_config_l
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
Chris, grep for custom_config_load() which loads that data. and see
why Build doesn't pick it up.
Found it. Should that be called during a test run, or just during the
build?
IF I slap a die right inside or custom_config_load, it doesn't die
during
Stas Bekman wrote:
Chris, grep for custom_config_load() which loads that data. and see why
Build doesn't pick it up.
Found it. Should that be called during a test run, or just during the build?
IF I slap a die right inside or custom_config_load, it doesn't die
during 'perl Build test'
-=Chris
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
This is an all out please for help form someone who understands the
structure of A-T a little better than I.
Just to recap, under ExtUtils::MakeMaker, 'make test' reads the location
of Apache.exe just fine for me. 'perl Build test' fails to read or
receive the value and e
29 matches
Mail list logo
