| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Old versions of Test::More |
| Date: | 2017-04-21 20:21:39 |
| Message-ID: | 26526.1492806099@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 4/21/17 14:49, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> I'll add a comment, but doing it in PostgresNode.pm would mean jacana
>> (for instance) couldn't run any of the TAP tests. I'mm looking at
>> installing a sufficiently modern Test::Simple package (includes
>> Test::More and test::Build) there, but other oldish machines could also
>> be affected.
> Or you could define note() as an empty function if it doesn't exist.
+1. I'm really not at all happy with the prospect that every time
somebody adds a use of "note" to some new TAP test, we're going to
get a complaint later that that test no longer works on jacana.
We need to either decide that non-ancient Test::More is a hard
requirement for all the tests, or fix things with a centralized
solution. A dummy (or not so dummy?) implementation would serve
for the latter.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ilya Roublev | 2017-04-21 20:31:46 | multithreading in Batch/pipelining mode for libpq |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-04-21 20:13:55 | Re: Unportable implementation of background worker start |