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

• Re: So, why isn't *every* buildfarm member failing ecpg right now? at 2007-06-04 14:50:17 from Michael Meskes

Responses

• Re: So, why isn't *every* buildfarm member failing ecpg right now? at 2007-06-04 17:18:14 from Kris Jurka

pgsql-hackers by date

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