Odd test report, how to address?

einhverfr has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Odd test report, how to address? by boftx (Deacon) on Nov 13, 2013 at 04:17 UTC
I just looked at the full cpantesters report for your module, and this appears to be the only failure. If Xcode is connected to your module somehow, then you might consider wrapping a test in such a way that it can control a SKIP block unless the whole package would depend on it. If on the other hand Xcode has nothing to do with your module (and I am under the impression it doesn't) then I don't see why you can't safely ignore this particular FAIL result, especially as there are four other 'darwin' versions reporting a PASS for you. Maybe an entry in the README file or a note in the POD would suffice. I don't think you would be wrong to follow up with the tester, but as you suggest, it might be an interesting exercise in diplomacy. :) The answer to the question "Can we do this?" is always an emphatic "Yes!" Just give me enough time and money.	[reply]
Re^2: Odd test report, how to address? by einhverfr (Friar) on Nov 13, 2013 at 04:20 UTC
This isn't even getting to the test case. This is happening when running the make, and Xcode isn't directly used by the module, or indirectly as far as I can tell. As far as I was able to find, this was an issue with "make" being a utility from apple that hadn't been configured yet which is why I figured I might want to follow up...	[reply]
Re^3: Odd test report, how to address? by boftx (Deacon) on Nov 13, 2013 at 04:31 UTC
Given that is the case, then I would definitely go with a note in README and then follow up with the tester. It might be possible to test for this in Makefile.pl before `make` is ever called, but why bother in an automated environment? It will still be reported as a FAIL. The answer to the question "Can we do this?" is always an emphatic "Yes!" Just give me enough time and money.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: Odd test report, how to address? by einhverfr (Friar) on Nov 13, 2013 at 05:16 UTC
Re^5: Odd test report, how to address? by boftx (Deacon) on Nov 13, 2013 at 05:26 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re: Odd test report, how to address? by DrHyde (Prior) on Nov 13, 2013 at 12:20 UTC
Don't bother trying to patch around this yourself, just notify the tester. IIRC that particular tester's ...@cpan.org email address works. BTW, the best forum for things like this is cpan-testers-discuss@perl.org, a low-traffic mailing list to which most testers are subscribed.	[reply]
Re: Odd test report, how to address? by kcott (Archbishop) on Nov 13, 2013 at 18:20 UTC
G'day einhverfr, Xcode is Mac OS X software. The problem is at the tester's end. There's nothing further for you to do regarding this report. If you look at "CPAN Testers Reports: Reports for Mail-RoundTrip", you'll see (in the second table): `Grade: UNKNOWN Perl version: 5.18.0 OS name: Mac OS X OS version: 12.4.0 Architecture: darwin-thread-multi-2level` [download] If you look at the report you linked to, you'll see much the same information in the `perl -V` output (under "`Platform:`"): `Platform: osname=darwin, osvers=12.4.0, archname=darwin-thread-multi-2level uname='darwin trushel-macbookpro.local 12.4.0 darwin kernel versio +n 12.4.0: ...` [download] Knowledge of Mac OS X and Xcode is not something you could be reasonably expected to have. I have a very similar system: `$ perl -v This is perl 5, version 18, subversion 1 (v5.18.1) built for darwin-th +read-multi-2level $ uname -a Darwin ganymede 11.4.2 Darwin Kernel Version 11.4.2: Thu Aug 23 16:25: +48 PDT 2012; root:xnu-1699.32.7~1/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64` [download] I've just installed Mail::RoundTrip (v0.02) without incident. I'm also a CPAN Tester so, when "CPAN Testers Reports: Reports for Mail-RoundTrip" is updated, you should see a PASS for `5.18.1; Mac OS X; darwin-thread-multi-2level`. [While previewing and checking links, I see that page is now in an update queue: it may be updated by the time you read this.] It's good that you "... try very hard to address all failure and unknown responses ...", but UNKNOWNs like this are beyond your control. -- Ken	[reply] [d/l] [select]