Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: So, why isn't *every* buildfarm member failing ecpg right now?

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>
Subject: Re: So, why isn't *every* buildfarm member failing ecpg right now?
Date: 2007-06-04 15:30:58
Message-ID: 46643032.7050009@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 03:30:07AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>   
>> AFAICS, Peter's recent incomplete updating of error message wording
>> should have broken every last man jack of 'em.  And yet there's still
>> some green to be seen.  I think we are looking at problems in the ecpg
>> test scaffolding.  For instance, dragonfly claims a green build, but
>> http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=dragonfly&dt=2007-06-04%20043001&stg=ecpg-check
>> shows this interesting trace:
>> ...
>> testing connect/test2.pgc                      ... ./pg_regress: bad substitution
>>     
>
> Is it possible to find out which line is reporting this error? Looks to
> me like some incompatibility on the shell side.
>   

turnip_moth is also a Solaris 9 box and doesn't seem have the same issue.

Kris, is there anything unusual installed on the box that would make it 
behave like this?

cheers

andrew


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Wilhansen LiDate: 2007-06-04 15:52:24
Subject: libpq and Binary Data Formats
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2007-06-04 15:18:53
Subject: Re: Running all tests by default

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group