in reply to Re^2: Perl-5.22.1 in ARM system
in thread Perl-5.22.1 in ARM system

:) Thanks for the reply. I am wondering/worried if this failure cause any more issue?

Issues with what?

No, your computer will not explode if a test fails

Its like you're assembling a bicycle, and you're missing a sticker/decal... -- explosion is imminent

There are 2 to 3 thousand test files ... and each does many tests ... so how many failed out of how many?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Perl-5.22.1 in ARM system (Ignoring test failures is stupid)
by 1nickt (Canon) on Dec 31, 2015 at 15:53 UTC

    The above is terrible advice.

    The tests are there for a reason: to alert you to problems or potential problems. While it is true that you can install and use modules when not all their tests pass, how will you know which test failures are safe to ignore?

    First you should investigate which test (s) is/are failing, then look at them to see what the significance is. Observe the log and then when you see a test reported as failing, go right to that test file and run it again, with the verbose flag, and see what it says as output. If that doesn't enlighten you, read the source for the test. If you don't get it, post a question on the module's support page. After one of these steps maybe you'll be able to conclude that the test is not that important and you can install the module anyway. Or, maybe you'll see that your system is incompatible with the version you are installing, or there's a missing linked C library or something like that.

    But simply to ignore test failures while building software, because there are just a few of them or for any other reason, is just completely stupid.

    The way forward always starts with a minimal test.
[reply]
[d/l]

      And yet, totally expedient when it comes to Perl.

      Not one version of perl I've built in the last 15 years has EVER compiled clean. Never. If I (and others) didn't 'ignore' those failures, we'd never have used perl.

      As for investigating and reporting them; that's pointless also. The same test failures have been reported ad nauseum; but unless they also fail on *nix; nothing ever changes.

      With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I knew I was on the right track :)
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]
      A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

      Re^4: Perl-5.22.1 in ARM system (Ignoring test failures is stupid) by 1nickt

      The above is terrible advice... If you don't get it, post a question on the module's support page.... how will you know which test failures are safe to ignore? ... But simply to ignore test failures while building software, because there are just a few of them or for any other reason, is just completely stupid.

      Did you investigate this failure 1nickt?

      How many core XS modules are there?

      Don't you think if this failure was important, that some others tests from those other XS module would fail?

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom