Thread
Commits
-
Require version 0.98 of Test::More for TAP tests
- 405f32fc4960 15.0 landed
-
Report found versions of required perl modules
- 1593998ae858 15.0 landed
-
Test::More version
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> — 2021-11-11T20:04:25Z
perldoc Test::More says: Key feature milestones include: subtests Subtests were released in Test::More 0.94, which came with Perl 5.12.0. Subtests did not implicitly call "done_testing()" until 0.96; the first Perl with that fix was Perl 5.14.0 with 0.98. "done_testing()" This was released in Test::More 0.88 and first shipped with Perl in 5.10.1 as part of Test::More 0.92. We actually test for a version >= 0.87 both in PostgreSQL::Test::Utils and in configure.ac. That seems wrong, since we need done_testing(). But I'd really like it if we could shift the goalposts a bit and require 0.96. subtests would be really nice to have available. Unfortunately I don't have any idea what versions of Test::More are actually in use. Perhaps we could add a line to one of the TAP tests that would spit out the version on the log? cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com -
Re: Test::More version
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> — 2021-11-11T20:31:59Z
On 2021-Nov-11, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > But I'd really like it if we could shift the goalposts a bit and require > 0.96. subtests would be really nice to have available. Agreed, subtests would be nice. > Perhaps we could add a line to one of the TAP tests that would spit out > the version on the log? Maybe have it spit out the version of *all* the modules we require (which aren't all that many), not just Test::More? -- Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
-
Re: Test::More version
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2021-11-11T20:44:27Z
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes: > On 2021-Nov-11, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Perhaps we could add a line to one of the TAP tests that would spit out >> the version on the log? > Maybe have it spit out the version of *all* the modules we require > (which aren't all that many), not just Test::More? Yeah ... configure is already checking those versions, so maybe we could make it print them out along the way? I'd been thinking of doing exactly this just for documentation purposes, so if there's a concrete need for it, let's get it done. Having said that, I don't think I believe that changelog entry, because prairiedog is doing just fine with $ perl -MTest::More -e 'print "$Test::More::VERSION\n"' 0.8701 I have no objection to updating prairiedog to whatever new minimum version we settle on. But if there are other buildfarm animals with old versions, that might be a reason not to change it. regards, tom lane
-
Re: Test::More version
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> — 2021-11-12T13:48:54Z
On 11.11.21 21:04, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > But I'd really like it if we could shift the goalposts a bit and require > 0.96. subtests would be really nice to have available. Unfortunately I > don't have any idea what versions of Test::More are actually in use. My initial patch for TAP tests used subtests, and IIRC that was taken out because the Perl that comes with CentOS 6 is too old.
-
Re: Test::More version
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> — 2021-11-12T15:00:14Z
On 11/11/21 15:44, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes: >> On 2021-Nov-11, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >>> Perhaps we could add a line to one of the TAP tests that would spit out >>> the version on the log? >> Maybe have it spit out the version of *all* the modules we require >> (which aren't all that many), not just Test::More? > Yeah ... configure is already checking those versions, so maybe we could > make it print them out along the way? I'd been thinking of doing exactly > this just for documentation purposes, so if there's a concrete need for > it, let's get it done. > The attached seems to do the trick: checking for perl module IPC::Run 0.79... 20200505.0 checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... 1.302183 checking for perl module Time::HiRes 1.52... 1.9764 > > I have no objection to updating prairiedog to whatever new minimum > version we settle on. But if there are other buildfarm animals with > old versions, that might be a reason not to change it. > > Yeah, let's see what's actually in use and then we can decide. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
-
Re: Test::More version
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2021-11-12T15:05:22Z
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > On 11/11/21 15:44, Tom Lane wrote: >> Yeah ... configure is already checking those versions, so maybe we could >> make it print them out along the way? I'd been thinking of doing exactly >> this just for documentation purposes, so if there's a concrete need for >> it, let's get it done. > The attached seems to do the trick: LGTM (by eyeball, didn't test) regards, tom lane
-
Re: Test::More version
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2021-11-12T15:30:14Z
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes: > On 11.11.21 21:04, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> But I'd really like it if we could shift the goalposts a bit and require >> 0.96. subtests would be really nice to have available. Unfortunately I >> don't have any idea what versions of Test::More are actually in use. > My initial patch for TAP tests used subtests, and IIRC that was taken > out because the Perl that comes with CentOS 6 is too old. I retired my RHEL6 installation a year ago, but I still have backups at hand (...digs...) Yeah, its Test/More.pm says $VERSION = '0.92'; so your recollection is accurate. RHEL6 has been EOL for awhile, and that specific platform isn't in the buildfarm, so it needn't constrain our decision. But it may well be that some of the older buildfarm members have similarly ancient Test::More. I await results from Andrew's patch. regards, tom lane
-
Re: Test::More version
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> — 2021-11-12T15:42:14Z
On 11/12/21 10:05, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: >> On 11/11/21 15:44, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Yeah ... configure is already checking those versions, so maybe we could >>> make it print them out along the way? I'd been thinking of doing exactly >>> this just for documentation purposes, so if there's a concrete need for >>> it, let's get it done. >> The attached seems to do the trick: > LGTM (by eyeball, didn't test) Thanks. pushed a slightly more robust version. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
-
Re: Test::More version
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2021-11-15T17:43:39Z
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > Thanks. pushed a slightly more robust version. I think we have enough info now to draw conclusions. There are several buildfarm animals that are running TAP tests but haven't reported since this went in. However, I don't think any of them will yield surprises: frogfish | 2021-11-10 02:24:27 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... ok mandrill | 2021-11-12 04:45:42 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... ok mereswine | 2021-11-12 09:48:49 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... ok sungazer | 2021-11-10 20:27:12 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... ok tern | 2021-11-09 05:27:38 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... ok topminnow | 2021-11-08 05:03:17 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... ok mereswine is running pretty up-to-date Debian, so that's not going to be an old version. mandrill, sungazer, and tern share the same host as hornet, which has reported using 1.302183. I cheated and looked at frogfish/topminnow's host, and it has Test::More 0.98: tgl@erpro8-fsf1:~$ perl -MTest::More -e 'print "$Test::More::VERSION\n"'; 0.98 So this should be a pretty complete summary of relevant old Test::More versions: prairiedog | 2021-11-13 12:38:32 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... 0.8701 lapwing | 2021-11-13 04:40:12 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... 0.98 prion | 2021-11-13 03:53:16 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... 0.98 snapper | 2021-11-13 17:27:29 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... 0.98 curculio | 2021-11-13 05:15:54 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... 1.001002 butterflyfish | 2021-11-13 06:00:29 | checking for perl module Test::More 0.87... 1.001014 There are a couple more running 1.001014, and everything else is 1.302something. So, discounting prairiedog's intentionally trailing-edge installation, the oldest stuff in the buildfarm is 0.98, of which there are five instances belonging to four different owners. Based on this, I'm inclined to think we should select 0.98 as the minimum version. Anything later would inconvenience some people. OTOH, it doesn't look like there's any value in promising compatibility with 0.96 instead, especially since I see a couple of subplan-related bug fixes in 0.97 and 0.98 in Test::Simple's changelog. regards, tom lane
-
Re: Test::More version
Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org> — 2021-11-15T18:42:53Z
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > Based on this, I'm inclined to think we should select 0.98 as the > minimum version. Anything later would inconvenience some people. > OTOH, it doesn't look like there's any value in promising compatibility > with 0.96 instead, especially since I see a couple of subplan-related > bug fixes in 0.97 and 0.98 in Test::Simple's changelog. FWIW, here's a list of Test::More versions shipped with various Perl releases. Since v5.12.0, the version does not change in minor releases. v5.8.3 0.47 v5.8.7 0.54 v5.8.8 0.62 v5.8.9 0.80 v5.10.0 0.72 v5.10.1 0.92 v5.12.0 0.94 v5.14.0 0.98 v5.16.0 0.98 v5.18.0 0.98 v5.20.0 1.001002 v5.22.0 1.001014 v5.24.0 1.001014 v5.26.0 1.302073 v5.28.0 1.302133 v5.30.0 1.302162 v5.32.0 1.302175 v5.34.0 1.302183 - ilmari
-
Re: Test::More version
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2021-11-15T19:14:36Z
=?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= <ilmari@ilmari.org> writes: > Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >> Based on this, I'm inclined to think we should select 0.98 as the >> minimum version. Anything later would inconvenience some people. >> OTOH, it doesn't look like there's any value in promising compatibility >> with 0.96 instead, especially since I see a couple of subplan-related >> bug fixes in 0.97 and 0.98 in Test::Simple's changelog. > FWIW, here's a list of Test::More versions shipped with various Perl > releases. Since v5.12.0, the version does not change in minor releases. > ... > v5.12.0 0.94 > v5.14.0 0.98 Ah-hah, that's a good way to think about it too. There's surely little reason in worrying about a module version that did not ship in any Perl release, because what 99.9% of people will have is what shipped with their Perl release. regards, tom lane
-
Re: Test::More version
Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org> — 2021-11-15T20:19:43Z
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > =?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= <ilmari@ilmari.org> writes: Your MUA seems a bit MIME-deficient… >> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >>> Based on this, I'm inclined to think we should select 0.98 as the >>> minimum version. Anything later would inconvenience some people. >>> OTOH, it doesn't look like there's any value in promising compatibility >>> with 0.96 instead, especially since I see a couple of subplan-related >>> bug fixes in 0.97 and 0.98 in Test::Simple's changelog. > >> FWIW, here's a list of Test::More versions shipped with various Perl >> releases. Since v5.12.0, the version does not change in minor releases. >> ... >> v5.12.0 0.94 >> v5.14.0 0.98 > > Ah-hah, that's a good way to think about it too. There's surely > little reason in worrying about a module version that did not ship > in any Perl release, because what 99.9% of people will have is what > shipped with their Perl release. Or newer, if they ever install anything from CPAN, since many modules depend on a newer version. Some OSes even package newer versions separately in addition to the core version, which install earlier in the include path. E.g. Debian has the following versions: Debian | Perl | core | packaged 8 | 5.20.2 | 1.001002 | 1.001008 9 | 5.24.1 | 1.001014 | 1.302075 10 | 5.28.1 | 1.302133 | 1.302162 11 | 5.32.1 | 1.302175 | 1.302183 - ilmari
-
Re: Test::More version
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> — 2021-11-16T16:05:43Z
On 11/15/21 14:14, Tom Lane wrote: > =?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= <ilmari@ilmari.org> writes: >> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >>> Based on this, I'm inclined to think we should select 0.98 as the >>> minimum version. Anything later would inconvenience some people. >>> OTOH, it doesn't look like there's any value in promising compatibility >>> with 0.96 instead, especially since I see a couple of subplan-related >>> bug fixes in 0.97 and 0.98 in Test::Simple's changelog. >> FWIW, here's a list of Test::More versions shipped with various Perl >> releases. Since v5.12.0, the version does not change in minor releases. >> ... >> v5.12.0 0.94 >> v5.14.0 0.98 > Ah-hah, that's a good way to think about it too. There's surely > little reason in worrying about a module version that did not ship > in any Perl release, because what 99.9% of people will have is what > shipped with their Perl release. > > And newer versions of Test::Simple/Test::More still work with very old versions of perl. jacana runs prove with perl 5.8.8 but has Test::More 1.001014 So I agree 0.98 seems like a perfectly reasonable target. You should be able to drop a replacement on prairiedog quite simply. For jacana I just unpacked it and pointed PERL5LIB at it. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
-
Re: Test::More version
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> — 2021-11-20T14:08:27Z
On 11/15/21 12:43, Tom Lane wrote: > > So, discounting prairiedog's intentionally trailing-edge installation, > the oldest stuff in the buildfarm is 0.98, of which there are five > instances belonging to four different owners. > > Based on this, I'm inclined to think we should select 0.98 as the > minimum version. Anything later would inconvenience some people. > OTOH, it doesn't look like there's any value in promising compatibility > with 0.96 instead, especially since I see a couple of subplan-related > bug fixes in 0.97 and 0.98 in Test::Simple's changelog. > > Yeah, so I think at this stage we're just waiting for you to update prairiedog and we can make this change. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
-
Re: Test::More version
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2021-11-20T16:14:14Z
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > Yeah, so I think at this stage we're just waiting for you to update > prairiedog and we can make this change. Oh! I was intentionally waiting to do that, with the idea of verifying that the version-detection test works ;-). I'm prepared to do it as soon as you push an update and we see prairiedog go red. regards, tom lane
-
Re: Test::More version
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> — 2021-11-20T22:58:07Z
On 11/20/21 11:14, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: >> Yeah, so I think at this stage we're just waiting for you to update >> prairiedog and we can make this change. > Oh! I was intentionally waiting to do that, with the idea of verifying > that the version-detection test works ;-). I'm prepared to do it as > soon as you push an update and we see prairiedog go red. Ah, ok. Pushed. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com