I realized that this wasn't CC'd here, and thought it should. Should we discuss ways to make sure all the smokers don't report issues that are known? Cheers, Kevin ----- Forwarded message from Kevin Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----- On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 08:26:07AM +0100, H.Merijn Brand ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spew-ed forth: > On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 18:52:46 -0500 (EST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > This is a build failure report for perl from [EMAIL PROTECTED], > > generated with the help of perlbug 1.33 running under perl v5.7.0. > > > > Daily build and smoke test by smokingjacket v0.01. > > > > Failed Test Status Wstat Total Fail Failed List of Failed > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > lib/db-btree.t 255 65280 157 14 8.92% 27-29, 48-49, 149-157 > > lib/db-hash.t 79 20224 111 90 81.08% 22-111 > > lib/db-recno.t 255 65280 128 11 8.59% 49, 51, 53, 55, 69, 75, 78, 125- > > Is it wrong to presume that people/builders/testers/smokers building bleadperl > *ALSO* /read/ p5p? No (and I do read p5p). > > Why is it that if Jarkko /explicitly/ tells that db-* fails with the latest > tarball that bug reports keep streaming in which report exactly what was > announced to fail? Because smokingjacket does not look to see if what things fail on have already been reported. A smoker doesn't manually report the bug. As well, this is from an rsync of perl-current, not the tarball. I understand your pain, though :) > > A PLEA TO ALL: > > *READ* what Jarkko writes as comments with the latest tarballs and *DO NOT* > report bugs that are announced, in order to prevent the perlbug database to > flood with duplicates that are *known* in advance. Maybe we need (as has been brought up) somewhere else to put the smoking results. I could see how if there are 100 smokers, that getting an announces bug reported 100 extra times would be very bad. > > Kevin, this is nothing personal, but you are number X to report the same > announced bug. Nothing taken personally :) I, for now, have taken the smokejacket script out of cron until a concensus has been made to how the bugs should be reported. Cheers, Kevin > > -- > H.Merijn Brand Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://www.amsterdam.pm.org/) > using perl-5.005.03, 5.6.0, 5.6.1, 5.7.1 & 623 on HP-UX 10.20 & 11.00, AIX 4.2 > AIX 4.3, WinNT 4, Win2K pro & WinCE 2.11 often with Tk800.022 &/| DBD-Unify > ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/languages/perl/CPAN/authors/id/H/HM/HMBRAND/ > -- All people have the right to be stupid, some people just abuse it! -- Frank Zappa ----- End forwarded message ----- -- "I find this a nice feature but it is not according to the documentation. Or is it a BUG?""Let's call it an accidental feature. :-)" -- Larry Wall in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
