Re: IPC::Run::time[r|out] vs our TAP tests

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: IPC::Run::time[r|out] vs our TAP tests
Date: 2024-04-04 23:09:53
Message-ID: 1120184.1712272193@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 05:24:05PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The particular thing that started me down this road was wondering
>> why we are getting no useful failure details from buildfarm member
>> tanager's struggles with the tab-completion test case added by commit
>> 927332b95 [1].

> Tom, would you like me to test your patch directly on the host? That
> should be pretty quick, even if I've not yet checked if the failure is
> reproducible with a manual build, outside the buildfarm scripts.

If you have time, that'd be great. What I suspect is that that
machine's readline isn't regurgitating the string verbatim but is
doing something fancy with backspaces or other control characters.
But we need to see what it's actually emitting before there's
much hope of adjusting the expected-output regex.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2024-04-04 23:38:11 Re: Built-in CTYPE provider
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2024-04-04 23:05:41 Re: IPC::Run::time[r|out] vs our TAP tests