On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 08:59:32AM -0000, Paul Marquess wrote: > From: Craig A. Berry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > At 11:47 PM +0000 1/8/06, Paul Marquess wrote: > > >From: John E. Malmberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >> Abe Timmerman wrote: > > >> > Here's the output of mmk test_harness: > > >> > > > >> > Failed Test Stat Wstat Total Fail Failed List > > of > > >> Failed > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > --- > > >> ------- > > > > > [-.ext.Compress.Zlib.t]04def.t 44 1024 1769 2 0.11% 42- > > 43 > > > > > > > > >Tests 42 & 43 are both checking that a test file doesn't exist, so I'm > > >guessing this failure is probably caused by a combination of VMS having > > file > > >versions plus a previous test not cleaning up temporary files after it is > > >done. > > > > Excellent guess. That explains why it was impossible to exercise the > > failure by running 04def.t by itself, but only when run with the > > other Compress::Zlib tests. > > > > >The enclosed patch tightens up the deletion of temporary files and, with > > any > > >luck, will sort out this failure on VMS. > > > > It does, thanks. > > Good stuff. > > > Will you release a new version soon or should we go > > ahead and get this into blead as is? > > That depends how imminent 5.9.3 is. I do have a new version nearly ready to > be released, but it has changed a *lot* of code.
Also depends on what you think the purpose of a development release is. I'd prefer to see your new version in, as long as there are at least a couple of days of smokes. > Can you put the patch into bleed as is anyway?
