Bug#648623: perl: test failures on hurd-i386

[Dominic Hargreaves]

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 11:39:08AM +0000, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 10:20:22AM +0200, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 04:51:29PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Package: perl
> > > Version: 5.14.2-2
> > > Severity: normal
> > > User: debian-hurd at lists.debian.org
> > > Usertags: hurd
> > 
> > > A few tests fail on hurd-i386:
> > > 
> > > Failed 9 tests out of 2029, 99.56% okay.
> > >         ../cpan/Sys-Syslog/t/syslog.t
> > >         ../cpan/Time-HiRes/t/HiRes.t
> > >         ../cpan/autodie/t/recv.t
> > >         ../dist/IO/t/io_pipe.t
> > >         ../dist/threads/t/libc.t
> > >         ../dist/threads/t/stack.t
> > >         ../ext/Socket/t/socketpair.t
> > >         io/pipe.t
> > >         op/sigdispatch.t
> > > 
> > > Could you mark them as TODO on GNU/Hurd?
> > 
> > Has anybody looked at the issues behind these failures?
> > 
> > I'd like to have a separate bug for each one, whether in hurd or perl,
> > so that we could at least refer to them in the Debian patch that marks
> > the tests as TODO.
> > 
> > However, instead of patching the tests, I think I'd actually prefer just
> > making debian/rules ignore test failures on GNU/Hurd so that the failures
> > would stay visible in the build log. Possibly this should be accompanied
> > by an RC bug on hurd so that the issues have to be resolved one way
> > or another if it becomes a release architecture.
> > 
> > Ignoring errors obviously has the downside of not catching any
> > regressions automatically. I suppose the hurd folks would need to assume
> > responsibility for that.
> > 
> > I don't feel very strongly about this; please let me know what you think.
> 
> I was about to implement this, but then I realised that ignoring the result
> of the whole test suite runs a real risk of installing a perl which is
> completely (or significantly) broken because of some other external change,
> so I think I'm swaying back towards the idea of patching out the failing
> tests instead.
> 
> Definitely agree we should have bugs for each of the known failures.

Bugs now created, and I'm almost done with the patches TODOing/SKIPing
tests as appropriate. If there are no objections I'll push this
later today or during the week.

Cheers,
Dominic.

-- 
Dominic Hargreaves | http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/
PGP key 5178E2A5 from the.earth.li (keyserver,web,email)