On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Kris Jurka wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
turnip_moth is also a Solaris 9 box and doesn't seem have the same issue.
Kris, is there anything unusual installed on the box that would make it
behave like this?
Not sure what's going on here. I did a ma
On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
turnip_moth is also a Solaris 9 box and doesn't seem have the same issue.
Kris, is there anything unusual installed on the box that would make it
behave like this?
Not sure what's going on here. I did a manual run of the ecpg tests and
it compl
Michael Meskes wrote:
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 03:30:07AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
AFAICS, Peter's recent incomplete updating of error message wording
should have broken every last man jack of 'em. And yet there's still
some green to be seen. I think we are looking at problems in the ecpg
te
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 03:30:07AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> AFAICS, Peter's recent incomplete updating of error message wording
> should have broken every last man jack of 'em. And yet there's still
> some green to be seen. I think we are looking at problems in the ecpg
> test scaffolding. For i
Tom Lane wrote:
AFAICS, Peter's recent incomplete updating of error message wording
should have broken every last man jack of 'em. And yet there's still
some green to be seen. I think we are looking at problems in the ecpg
test scaffolding.
Yes. The buildfarm script uses the same logic as
AFAICS, Peter's recent incomplete updating of error message wording
should have broken every last man jack of 'em. And yet there's still
some green to be seen. I think we are looking at problems in the ecpg
test scaffolding. For instance, dragonfly claims a green build, but
http://www.pgbuildfar
