Resolving ticket.
On Sun Feb 24 19:44:02 2008, coke wrote:
SNIP
All tests successful.
Files=261, Tests=3095, 84 wallclock secs ( 1.27 usr 1.69 sys + 25.98
cusr 13.99 csys =
42.93 CPU)
Result: PASS
normal config output
All tests successful.
Files=42, Tests=1149, 31 wallclock secs ( 0.31 usr 0.22 sys +
Parrot Bug Summary
http://rt.perl.org/rt3/NoAuth/parrot/Overview.html
Generated at Mon Feb 25 14:00:02 2008 GMT
---
* Numbers
* New Issues
* Overview of Open Issues
* Ticket Status By Version
* Requestors with
On Sun, 24 Feb 2008, James Keenan via RT wrote:
This is the second oldest unresolved ticket in the Parrot RT queue. Let
me ask a naïve question: We have a configuration step called auto::env
whose description reads, Determining if the C library has Csetenv()
and Cunsetenv(). Assuming this
On Mon Feb 25 07:39:41 2008, doughera wrote:
(This is not trivial. The relevant code is mostly in perl.c and
util.c, along with various Configure tests. There are additional
vms-specific implementations in vms/vms.c. It's been a long time since I
looked at any of it. I just remember it
on parrotcode.org/docs, this is still a link, but it shouldn't:
http://www.parrotcode.org/docs/imcc/imcc.html
the file that this link links to was removed as well.
kjs
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 6:22 AM, Will Coleda via RT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
According to our records, your request
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008, James Keenan via RT wrote:
The patch attached, diff.trunk.tcif.txt, addresses both RT 47391
(t/configure/1*.t tests incorrectly rely on init::defaults_ and RT 47503
(Remove config::init::defaults From configure tests). It accomplishes
the following:
Thanks for working
On Mon Feb 25 13:09:04 2008, doughera wrote:
This sounds to me as if it assumes all the tests will be running in
order
every time.
For the most part, this is true. However, once we work out the kinks,
this will not be cause for alarm.
We want our tests to simulate the development of the
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, James Keenan via RT wrote:
On Mon Feb 25 13:09:04 2008, doughera wrote:
This sounds to me as if it assumes all the tests will be running in
order
every time.
For the most part, this is true. However, once we work out the kinks,
this will not be cause for
On Mon Feb 25 18:56:44 2008, doughera wrote:
Yes. Exactly. I have been arguing that point for years. Every step
can involve triggers, or callbacks, which can invoke arbitrary code
and even change the results of preceeding steps. It is very much
history-dependent. I think the best disk
Anyone out there using Eclipse? I figure there might be value in its
ability to handle large codebases all at once.
Any pointers for startup and using the existing parrot project?
xoxo,
andy
--
Andy Lester = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = www.petdance.com = AIM:petdance
11 matches
Mail list logo
