in reply to Re^2: Advice wanted for debugging CPAN Testers failures
in thread Advice wanted for debugging CPAN Testers failures

apparently the same system, with two different perl versions but same gcc version and same libc version, got different results

Are you sure ?
It's no big deal but I'd be interested to see 2 reports indicative of that.

Cheers,
Rob
  • Comment on Re^3: Advice wanted for debugging CPAN Testers failures

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Advice wanted for debugging CPAN Testers failures
by stevieb (Canon) on Aug 24, 2016 at 12:54 UTC
Re^4: Advice wanted for debugging CPAN Testers failures
by pryrt (Abbot) on Aug 24, 2016 at 13:59 UTC
    I'd be interested to see 2 reports indicative of that.

    The two reports linked in my original post: both showed linux 3.16.0-4-amd64 debian 3.16.7-ckt25-2 (2016-04-08) with gccversion='4.9.2', libc=libc-2.19.so, and gnulibc_version='2.19', the only difference being 5.20.1 vs 5.22.0. But as stevieb replied, it's probably the improved NaN handling in 5.22 which fixed the bug. (Which then surprises me that my ancient linux perl v5.8.5 passed... but then again, there were probably other NaN handling changes in Perl or differences between the systems/compilers).

    excerpts from the fail reports in the spoiler

      Interesting. I didn't realise that perl had got actively involved in standardising the signedness of NaNs.
      Thanks for the heads up stevieb, pryrt.

      Cheers,
      Rob