Ok, I'll start from there, thanks.
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: > I went ahead and committed what was there and ran tests > to make sure it runs clean before doing so. > >> On Jan 8, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Yann Ylavic <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Paul Spangler <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 1/8/2016 6:49 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>>> >>>> Just noticed that the test framework reports issues w/ sessions on trunk: >>>> >>>> t/modules/session.t ................. 1/105 # Failed test 8 in >>>> t/modules/session.t at line 63 fail #2 >>>> # Failed test 18 in t/modules/session.t at line 63 fail #4 >>>> # Failed test 38 in t/modules/session.t at line 63 fail #8 >>>> # Failed test 43 in t/modules/session.t at line 63 fail #9 >>>> # Failed test 48 in t/modules/session.t at line 63 fail #10 >>>> # Failed test 53 in t/modules/session.t at line 63 fail #11 *TODO* >>>> # Failed test 54 in t/modules/session.t at line 65 fail #11 *TODO* >>>> # Failed test 58 in t/modules/session.t at line 63 fail #12 >>>> # Failed test 63 in t/modules/session.t at line 63 fail #13 >>>> # Failed test 88 in t/modules/session.t at line 63 fail #18 *TODO* >>>> # Failed test 89 in t/modules/session.t at line 65 fail #18 *TODO* >>>> # Failed test 98 in t/modules/session.t at line 63 fail #20 >>>> >>>> (of course, I am ignoring the TODOs) >>>> >>>> Can anyone confirm? >>>> >>> I believe this is because of the patch committed for PR 57300 (r1709121), >>> but the test changes that go with it (attached to the bug report) did not >>> get committed. >> >> Yes my bad, I committed the code changes but got interrupted by >> something else, and forgot to come back for committing the associated >> tests. >> >> If I recall correctly, there are some changes from r1709121 that are >> not taken into account by the tests. >> I'll (re)take a look at the whole thing soon. >> >> Regards, >> Yann. >
