Re: [HACKERS] (: JDBC+(Sun ~3:pm MST) CVS :) -also question about regression tests
От | The Hermit Hacker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] (: JDBC+(Sun ~3:pm MST) CVS :) -also question about regression tests |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.NEB.3.95.980202115834.19661Q-100000@hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] (: JDBC+(Sun ~3:pm MST) CVS :) -also question about regression tests (teunis <teunis@mauve.computersupportcentre.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] (: JDBC+(Sun ~3:pm MST) CVS :) -also question about regression tests
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, teunis wrote: > On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Thomas G. Lockhart wrote: > > > > > JDBC works > > > > postgres works > > > > platform : linux (I'm not posting kernel version! it doesn't matter!! :) > > > > egcs-2.91.06 (gcc-2.8.0 with haifa scheduler + other updates) > > > > glibc-2.0.5c from RedHat-5.0 distrib - should be stable > > > > [but with full crypt, locale] > > > > > > > > But : Here's output from regression tests: > > > > Is there anything wrong with the failed tests? (is it known?) > > > > > > I get the same regression output. checkresults shows you the problems, > > > and it mostly error message words or rounding. > > > > Hmm. A linux box is used to generate the expected results, so we need to be > > more careful here. I suspect that you have date/time trouble reported earlier > > by (Oliver?? can't find the e-mail, sorry). A few of the math functions in > > glibc2.0.x were misbehaving, leading to troubles like '3 hours 59 minutes 60 > > seconds' rather than '4 hours' in timespan output. > > > > That person submitted patches, but they were pretty specific to the glibc2 > > problems. Of course, I've already got some ugly code in there because Solaris > > had some similar broken math, so perhaps we should figure out how to extract > > all of the busted code into the port-specific files? > > I'll say it again and again - glibc-2.0 is the _STANDARD_ (actually > reference) platform for Unix. All Unix. Not just Linux. > Adopted last year. And...how many Unix (other then Linux) are *actually* using it? Any idea on how we can test whether it is being used or not? The "let's break all ports except Linux because the rest don't follow a new standard" argument just don't hold water for those not using Linux :)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: