[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: EUnit failure?
From: |
Romain Lenglet |
Subject: |
Re: EUnit failure? |
Date: |
Thu, 20 Aug 2009 08:55:29 +0900 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) |
Hello Ralf,
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello Romain,
>
> thanks for your work on this!
>
> * Romain Lenglet wrote on Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 02:37:39PM CEST:
>> Here is that patch.
>> I have tested only with Erlang/OTP R13B, but it should also work with R12B.
>
> Sorry, still fails, see below.
I tested this patch using R12B, from the same Ubuntu package you are
using, and it now works for me.
>> +Crash dump was written to: erl_crash.dump
>> +init terminating in do_boot ()
>> stdout:
>> {"init terminating in
>> do_boot",{undef,[{init,stop,"M"},{init,start_it,1},{init,start_em,1}]}}
>> ./suite.at:3: exit code was 1, expected 0
>> 1. suite.at:2: 1. my only test (suite.at:2): FAILED (suite.at:3)
The {init,stop,"M"} indicates that there is still a call to
init:stop(77) done in AT_CHECK_EUNIT. The new implementation of
AT_CHECK_EUNIT in my patch doesn't do that anymore.
This suggests that either the patch didn't apply cleanly, or you didn't
run "make" and "make testsuite" after applying the patch?
--
Romain Lenglet
- Re: EUnit failure?, (continued)
- Re: EUnit failure?, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/08/11
- Re: EUnit failure?, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/08/11
- Re: EUnit failure?, Romain Lenglet, 2009/08/11
- Re: EUnit failure?, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/08/13
- Re: EUnit failure?, Romain Lenglet, 2009/08/18
- Re: EUnit failure?, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/08/18
- Re: EUnit failure?, Romain Lenglet, 2009/08/18
- Re: EUnit failure?, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/08/19
- Re: EUnit failure?, Romain Lenglet, 2009/08/19
- Re: EUnit failure?, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/08/19
- Re: EUnit failure?,
Romain Lenglet <=
- Re: EUnit failure?, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/08/22