Closed jkeenan closed 8 months ago
We apparently don't have any tests of "static perls" in our GH workflow, nor do we have any in our contributed smoke tests. This is what I found today in blead:
In fact I discovered it while trying to add such a smoke configurations.
I would suggest this would be a blocker for 5.40
What would it take to get these tests to PASS under -Uusedl?
I suspect only @demerphq knows the answer to that.
This is fun.
git clean -dfX ; sh ./Configure -des -Dusedevel -Uusedl && make test_prep && cd t && ./perl re/reg_mesg.t
fails as above, but
git clean -dfX ; sh ./Configure -des -Doptimize=-g -Dusedevel -Uusedl && make test_prep && cd t && ./perl re/reg_mesg.t
(as produced by Porting/bisect-runner.pl
) passes.
Fails:
git clean -dfX ; sh ./Configure -des -Doptimize=-O2 -Dusedevel -Uusedl && make test_prep -j8 && cd t && ./perl re/reg_mesg.t
So it might be a linking/naming issue like Nick alluded to on irc
I believe it's related to #21550 which I'm looking at.
This is actually a duplicate of #21558
Closing this as it's a duplicate of #21558 but see over there anyway.
As I followed the discussion in https://github.com/Perl/perl5/issues/21750, I was struck by @Leont's comment that, notwithstanding the merging of https://github.com/Perl/perl5/pull/21320 last August, some tests were failing on static perls. We apparently don't have any tests of "static perls" in our GH workflow, nor do we have any in our contributed smoke tests. This is what I found today in blead:
Peering into the verbose output, I see:
Questions:
What would it take to get these tests to PASS under
-Uusedl
?In the meantime, shouldn't they be TODOed under
-Uusedl
?Also in the meantime, shouldn't this limitation of
-Uusedl
be documented in the "Dynamic Loading" section ofINSTALL
?