Issue497160
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2001-12-27 21:38 by prjsf, last changed 2022-04-10 16:04 by admin. This issue is now closed.
Messages (11) | |||
---|---|---|---|
msg8513 - (view) | Author: Paul Jarc (prjsf) | Date: 2001-12-27 21:38 | |
I got this test failure while building Python 2.2: test test_commands failed -- Traceback (most recent call last): File "./Lib/test/test_commands.py", line 43, in test_getstatus self.assert_(re.match(pat, getstatus("/bin/ls"), re.VERBOSE)) File "/fs/home/mount/home/prj/b/Python-2.2/Lib/unittest.py", line 262, in failUnless if not expr: raise self.failureException, msg AssertionError My ls happens to be somewhere other than /bin. It would be nice if the test used a different file, such as "/", ".", or even "./Lib/test/test_commands.py". |
|||
msg8514 - (view) | Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) * | Date: 2001-12-28 21:56 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=6380 I think you are going to get in a lot of trouble when /bin/ls doesn't exist. It's not worth fixing the test suite for this. |
|||
msg8515 - (view) | Author: Paul Jarc (prjsf) | Date: 2001-12-28 22:20 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=412110 The test suite already uses $PATH to *run* ls (as does other software, which is why I don't get into a lot of trouble). It merely uses /bin/ls as a filename to pass to ls so it can check the output. Any other filename will do just as well here, and the fix is extremely simple; what's the benefit of listing /bin/ls in particular that makes it worth risk breaking on systems like this? |
|||
msg8516 - (view) | Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) * | Date: 2001-12-28 22:42 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=6380 If the patch is so simple, why don't you provide it? |
|||
msg8517 - (view) | Author: Sjoerd Mullender (sjoerd) * | Date: 2001-12-29 11:55 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=43607 This bug report is related to [ #460613 ] test_commands fails on SGI, which nobody ever seems to have noticed and which is still open. The problem there is that /bin/ls *does* exist, but is a symlink. |
|||
msg8518 - (view) | Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) * | Date: 2001-12-29 14:54 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=6380 OK, reopening. |
|||
msg8519 - (view) | Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) * | Date: 2001-12-29 14:55 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=6380 Assigned to Fred Drake, who wrote the test suite. |
|||
msg8520 - (view) | Author: Paul Jarc (prjsf) | Date: 2001-12-31 07:12 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=412110 Sorry, I should have thought of providing a patch to begin with. <URL:http://multivac.cwru.edu./prj/python-test-commands.patch> This regexp test is weaker than the original one, but seems to be still stronger than necessary. If ls is broken here, we don't care, because it isn't part of Python. All wee need is to be able to spawn a shell. |
|||
msg8521 - (view) | Author: Paul Jarc (prjsf) | Date: 2002-03-26 21:50 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=412110 This problem still exists in 2.2.1c2. Is there something wrong with my patch? |
|||
msg8522 - (view) | Author: Michael Hudson (mwh) | Date: 2002-03-27 20:36 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=6656 No attempt was made to fix this for 2.2.1c2. I didn't make fixing little bugs in the tests a priority, sorry. I don't think it's been fixed on the trunk. |
|||
msg8523 - (view) | Author: Fred Drake (fdrake) | Date: 2002-04-01 23:58 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=3066 Checked in patch as provided in Lib/test/test_commands.py revision 1.4; closed bug #460613 as well. |
History | |||
---|---|---|---|
Date | User | Action | Args |
2022-04-10 16:04:50 | admin | set | github: 35839 |
2001-12-27 21:38:45 | prjsf | create |