Re: A::T :withtestmore
> [Sun Jul 11 16:31:59 2004] [notice] Accept mutex: sysvsem (Default: sysvsem) > Warning: Use of "require" without parentheses is ambiguous at (eval 12) > line 1. > [Sun Jul 11 16:32:01 2004] [error] Undefined subroutine > &TestApache::My::Bug::bug-tm::handler called.\n > [Sun Jul 11 16:32:01 2004] [info] removed PID file > /home/william/perl/bug-reporting-skeleton-mp1/t/logs/httpd.pid (pid=2537) > > > Do you see this error when you run my package? yup. > > This makes me think that there may be a problem in the bug testing > framework itself when used in conjunction with the -testmore action. I don't think so :) > I > don't see a require statement in Bug.pm so am at a loss to say why this > would be failing. I tried changing the name of bug-tm.pm to bug_tm.pm in > case the hypen was a problem; it didn't help. Any other ideas? I changed it to bugpm.pm (and changed the package name) and it worked fine. --Geoff
Re: t_cmp() revisited
Stas Bekman wrote: > so we reverted the args to t_cmp() to comply with other Test modules > conventions, but why reverting the debug printout? I find it confusing: > > # received: undef > # expected: foobar > > Do the other test modules also print it reversed? Test::More::is() looks like this: 1..1 not ok 1 - foo should have been foo # Failed test (foo.pl at line 5) # got: 'foo' # expected: 'bar' I don't suppose it matters so long as the arguments are labled correctly. --Geoff
Re: t_cmp() revisited
Stas Bekman wrote: so we reverted the args to t_cmp() to comply with other Test modules conventions, but why reverting the debug printout? I find it confusing: # received: undef # expected: foobar Do the other test modules also print it reversed? OK, as agreed over irc I've reversed those only for the debug printout. -- __ Stas BekmanJAm_pH --> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: flood config question
On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 16:52:03 +0100 Pete Stokes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi. > > I am trying to use flood, and I am wondering is there a list of > options available for elements, i.e. > > generic > > what other options exist for socket? > > I'm after a source of info for as much as possible to enable me to try > > out all features. Please have look at: http://cvs.apache.org/~jacekp/manual/ This is still-up-to-date build of flood manual. If you prefer, you can have your own build (for example as PDF file if you have xsl:fo engine). Please see docs/README file for that. The information you are looking for can be found in chapter 6. Basically you have 3 choices: generic, keepalive and ssl. There is not much information, but the options are pretty self explanatory. Generic sockets die right after response, keepalive sockets linger around for a while, and ssl sockets provide support for https requests. If you feel that certain aspect of flood needs to be described in greater detail, then please let us know. You can also prepare missing paragraphs yourself, and post them here (either as plain text or as patches against DocBook XML). Any input would be greatly apreciated. regards, Jacek Prucia
t_cmp() revisited
so we reverted the args to t_cmp() to comply with other Test modules conventions, but why reverting the debug printout? I find it confusing: # received: undef # expected: foobar Do the other test modules also print it reversed? -- __ Stas BekmanJAm_pH --> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
