Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2009
David, I just tested the following configurations: maint-5.10: f9961a059c818ac71464be22671a6aeb834e3c87: (maint-5.10 today) config_args='-des -Dusedevel=y -Dprefix=....' => All PPI tests pass maint-5.10: 4197df1c01e2dfc5696fdf240ed03bc5a914db46: config_args='-des -Dusedevel=y -Dprefix=....' => All PPI tests pass maint-5.10: 4197df1c01e2dfc5696fdf240ed03bc5a914db46: config_args='-Dprefix=... -ders -Dusedevel -Dcf_by=David Favor -Dcf_email=david@davidfavor.com -Dperladmin=david@davidfavor.com -Dcc=gcc -Doptimize=-O2 -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -fstack-protector -mtune=generic -Dloclibpth=/usr/local/lib -Dlocincpth=/usr/local/include -Duseshrplib -Dusethreads -Uuseithreads -Duselargefiles -Dd_dosuid -Dd_semctl_semun -Dotherlibdirs=/runtime/pmlib:/common/pmlib:/usr/local/pmlib -Ui_db -Ui_ndbm -Di_gdbm -Di_shadow -Di_syslog -Dman3ext=3pm -Duseperlio -Dinstallusrbinperl=n -Ubincompat5005 -Uversiononly -Dpager=/usr/bin/less -Dd_gethostent_r_proto -Ud_endhostent_r_proto -Ud_sethostent_r_proto -Ud_endprotoent_r_proto -Ud_setprotoent_r_proto -Ud_endservent_r_proto -Ud_setservent_r_proto' => All PPI tests pass Summary: I can not reproduce this failure. And additional question: - can you still reproduce this? - did you run make test after building the perl? (did any of the tests fail?) - how did you build perl? - did you first do a git clean -d -x -f? - ...? Also: Craig asked some questions. See the mail at the end. Can you please supply an answer to these questions? Best regards, Bram Citeren "Craig A. Berry" <craig.a.berry@gmail.com>: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 4:24 AM, demerphq<demerphq@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2009/7/28 David Favor <david@davidfavor.com>: >>> As an example here's a compile of PPI which works >>> and one which fails. >>> >>> perl-5.10.1-1641 >>> http://davidfavor.com/archive/perl-bug/works.txt >>> >>> perl-5.10.1-1655 >>> http://davidfavor.com/archive/perl-bug/fails.txt >> >> That was a doc patch. Can you try your test again from a few >> commits earlier? > > Thanks for the report, David, and thanks for testing. After climbing > back into the chair from which I'd fallen and looking up what PPI is, > I realized that nothing "breaks 100s of modules." Something breaks > one module, PPI, which now apparently has pretty basic difficulties > doing its job of parsing other modules. > > As Yves says, narrowing this down further would help (maybe use git > bisect?). You might also look into why on your run with failures, the > manifest checker finds cache files from a previous run: > > Not in MANIFEST: t/data/18_cache/6/64/64568092e7faba16d99fa04706c46517.ppi > Not in MANIFEST: t/data/18_cache/a/ab/abcdef1234567890abcdef1234567890.ppi > > Does clearing those out manually make any difference in the test > failures? Even if it doesn't, the clean targets in PPI may need a > little attention. > > The tests that fail spew a lot of warnings that weren't there before. > Can you follow the clues they give about where the trouble might be > and create a smaller reproducer? > > I'm cc'ing Adam Kennedy, who appears to be the PPI maintainer, in case > he has any advice or insight. >Thread Previous | Thread Next