On 4/19/07, Allison Randal via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do you have a test case that shows where the current behavior is incorrect?
The attached test case demonstrates that passing NULL from C into PIR,
then passing that value to C, causes the wrong init method to be
called. Yes, it's rar
The patch I applied has been overridden by further patches (r18291-18292)
applied in response
to RT 42618.
Fixed in revision 18292. I carried over to these tests code I used in
t/tools/pmc2cutils/*.t,
where it was more needed.
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Joshua Isom via RT wrote:
>
> On Apr 20, 2007, at 9:18 AM, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> As far as I know, --gc-debug doesn't actually do anything at all. How
> much ram do you have available when you start running the test? You
> might be doing a lot of swapping in and out of
On Apr 20, 2007, at 9:18 AM, Andy Dougherty wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 11:47:55AM -0700, Andy Dougherty wrote:
t/compilers/pge/p5regex/p5rx.Parrot VM: PANIC: Out of
mem!
I believe that both of these tests are currentl
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, chromatic via RT wrote:
> On Thursday 19 April 2007 11:35, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
> > While trying to run 'make test' today, t/stm/llqueue_2.pir hung and had
> > to be killed manually. Trying it again, I got an out-of-memory error
>
> > The hanging behavior appears to be i
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:18:41AM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote:
> > > This does prompt the question of removing -G from the tests,
> > > but the last time I looked into doing this (ab
On 4/20/07, Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:18:41AM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote:
> > This does prompt the question of removing -G from the tests,
> > but the last time I looked into doing this (about
On 4/20/07, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote:
> After a lot of discussion on the mailing
> list and in #parrot I think it was decided that running the
> tests with -G was preferable to having random test failures
>
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:18:41AM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote:
> > This does prompt the question of removing -G from the tests,
> > but the last time I looked into doing this (about a month ago) Parrot
> > still had intermittent GC errors th
Just to say that the pkgsrc team accepted by patch and parrot 0.4.11 is
now in pkgsrc.
The NetBSD project make "bulkbuilds" on different architectures and OS
of the whole pkgsrc tree publishing the compilation results.
This will be useful for testing the portability on non-wide-use archs.
--pa
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote:
> After a lot of discussion on the mailing
> list and in #parrot I think it was decided that running the
> tests with -G was preferable to having random test failures
> showing up in the pge tests due to GC problems in Parr
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 11:47:55AM -0700, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> > t/compilers/pge/p5regex/p5rx.Parrot VM: PANIC: Out of mem!
> I believe that both of these tests are currently being run with
> the -G flag, which should mean t
On Apr 19, 2007, at 8:18 PM, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 11:47:55AM -0700, Andy Dougherty wrote:
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #42620]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/r
14 matches
Mail list logo
