Melvin Backus wrote: > If in fact that is the case then nothing more is required. I was under the > impression that was in fact the case, but it is always within reason to > expect that some particular module may have been missed, etc. Assuming > that isn't the case, then perhaps the problem was truly caused because of a > version mismatch or a corrupt installation. I suspect that unless we can > reproduce that failure mode we'll never really know for sure. >
True. I was not able to get Travis to do the debugging I would have preferred. > The only further means of protection that I can think of which might > prevent any such related issue would be to disable the configuration > options which require modules which aren't loaded. I suspect that this > could be a formidable task however and don't know that it would really be > worth the effort to pursue. Yes, it would be a formidable task because of how the GUI interface is currently coded. It would require a re-write of a substantial chunk. While I like the idea of that type of protection, its something that would take a lot of effort. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Assp-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
