Hi Paul,
as a convenience feature when typing negative offsets, foo:-n and
foo=-n can be entered as foo::n and foo==n respectively.
I dislike this. Must be my preference for Python's `one way to do it'
over Perl's `there must still be one more way we haven't added yet'.
:-) `-' doesn't need
Ralph wrote:
Hi Paul,
as a convenience feature when typing negative offsets, foo:-n and
foo=-n can be entered as foo::n and foo==n respectively.
I dislike this. Must be my preference for Python's `one way to do it'
over Perl's `there must still be one more way we haven't added yet'.
is make check the only way to invoke the tests? i couldn't see
an easy way to invoke just one.
As David pointed out, a lot of the tests can be invoked directly, but you
_can_ use make to invoke just one test. Just set the TESTS argument as
part of make check. Well, you probably want to run the
ken wrote:
% make check TESTS=test/inc/test-inc-scanout test/cleanup
ah, good.
two pastes -- the first is the normal output of running the test:
http://dev.laptop.org/~pgf/z/pb1366291618.txt
the second is the result of adding
set -x
exec 2/tmp/test-slocal.out
to the top of
david wrote:
Paul F. wrote:
so it looks to me like this command:
/home/pgf/src/pdom/nmh/nmh.git/test/testdir/inst/usr/local/nmh.git/lib/sl
ocal -maildelivery
/home/pgf/src/pdom/nmh/nmh.git/test/testdir/Mail/maildeliv
ery
should have produced the .actual file, but
Paul wrote:
WARNING: /home/pgf/src/pdom/nmh/nmh.git/test/testdir/Mail/maildelivery has
bad ownership/modes (su=0,uid=1000,owner=1000,mode=0100664)
(delivering to standard mail spool)
So you have a umask of 0002?
I'll add this to the test, that should fix it:
@@ -78,0 +79 @@ EOF
+chmod go-w
david wrote:
Paul wrote:
WARNING: /home/pgf/src/pdom/nmh/nmh.git/test/testdir/Mail/maildelivery has
bad ownership/modes (su=0,uid=1000,owner=1000,mode=0100664)
(delivering to standard mail spool)
So you have a umask of 0002?
yes.
I'll add this to the test, that should fix
On 2013-04-18, at 8:16 AM, David Levine wrote:
So you have a umask of 0002?
I'll add this to the test, that should fix it:
Why not set an explicit umask instead?
___
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers@nongnu.org
Lyndon wrote:
On 2013-04-18, at 8:16 AM, David Levine wrote:
So you have a umask of 0002?
I'll add this to the test, that should fix it:
Why not set an explicit umask instead?
I prefer that the test suite not hide other situations where
it also might matter. Though in this case, I
