On 31 July 2016 at 19:06, Father Chrysostomos via RT <perlbug-followup@perl.org> wrote: > On Sun Jul 31 06:39:20 2016, sprout wrote: >> Thank you for the explanation. I failed to read the ‘against maint- >> 5.24‘ part! >> >> I believe this is unprecedented, > > No, it’s not. It is actually a regression, since perl did not always fail its tests with those env vars set. (This is comparable to the test fix backported to 5.12 that made it pass with HTTPS_PROXY set.) > Taking Father C's +1 and Peter Rabbitson's implicit +1 (if that's ok?!), plus my own vote, I will go ahead and pull this into maint-5.24. Presumably the same changes also need porting to maint-5.22? The patch againt maint-5.24 doesn't apply well, but I've made the changes manually -- see attached patch. If this is correct (and necessary?) then I will pull this in too.Thread Previous | Thread Next