From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivered-To: chneukirchen@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.96.6 with SMTP id do6csp244173qeb; Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:59:44 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of rack-devel+bncBD75LW742ECRBHXL76CAKGQEJNLRKHI@googlegroups.com designates 10.68.229.231 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.68.229.231 Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of rack-devel+bncBD75LW742ECRBHXL76CAKGQEJNLRKHI@googlegroups.com designates 10.68.229.231 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rack-devel+bncBD75LW742ECRBHXL76CAKGQEJNLRKHI@googlegroups.com; dkim=pass header.i=rack-devel+bncBD75LW742ECRBHXL76CAKGQEJNLRKHI@googlegroups.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.68.229.231]) by 10.68.229.231 with SMTP id st7mr10782706pbc.2.1352660384182 (num_hops = 1); Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:59:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :message-id:references:to:x-mailer:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=SM1aojm/b8IIO5U14ZN31XjselU2zc9g4UQVhR1RpNw=; b=rKDcP+bIRqLpjrazDARbVWb6aE9l7FSoDWygT8PwcwGXnfnkuy5rCs/VaVKAUW99sB iMG7o8nnsz8dHhs+P9jQtXvLo43tMnRFVPDh+6ozkN6Hg6J7RoQoCPwteldk4hGj75RF dDeafCossIwWa2I/yGnGpdhbGE3CFppw61hxw3diF2XgXNZs2gKkXK44PrZ3VmOdpiVK /Uk2GKkXs+CjIxmz0SHMCXtF302ETksLojfZyqF893pIb018pj2N+lVp4RbpQJV+u6a2 aUXmjKdMknr2ECiAIDAwzyYvdD5O4JwhdmF0mxxwrZ+iFFm9MQvUrLCp7yjSnhNoeZPM 0Siw== Received: by 10.68.229.231 with SMTP id st7mr3255660pbc.2.1352660383751; Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:59:43 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: rack-devel@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.68.232.200 with SMTP id tq8ls2602789pbc.8.gmail; Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:59:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.87.234 with SMTP id bb10mr6634211pab.36.1352660381784; Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:59:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.87.234 with SMTP id bb10mr6634210pab.36.1352660381772; Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:59:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id js4si957368pbb.2.2012.11.11.10.59.41 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:59:41 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jftucker@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.44 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.160.44; Received: by mail-pb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id uo1so494510pbc.31 for ; Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:59:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.68.136.9 with SMTP id pw9mr44776963pbb.155.1352660381677; Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:59:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.33] (c-67-180-21-214.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [67.180.21.214]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id mz10sm2855160pbc.37.2012.11.11.10.59.40 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:59:41 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) Subject: Re: Running rack tests on Windows (both 1.9.3 and 2.0.0) From: James Tucker In-Reply-To: <0693588c-1dac-4b09-bd4f-5441a6143d49@googlegroups.com> Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:59:40 -0800 Message-Id: References: <0693588c-1dac-4b09-bd4f-5441a6143d49@googlegroups.com> To: rack-devel@googlegroups.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) X-Original-Sender: jftucker@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jftucker@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.44 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jftucker@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: rack-devel@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list rack-devel@googlegroups.com; contact rack-devel+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 486215384060 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: rack-devel@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Nov 11, 2012, at 5:20 AM, Luis Lavena wrote: > Hello, >=20 > I've started to look into Rack (and its tests) on Windows just to = ensure things are running as much properly as possible. Awesome, thanks! > I found a few hardcoded values to temporary files (/tmp/rack_sendfile) = that is blocking spec_sendfile.rb from executing. Those sound easy, if you get an issue open I'll make sure to get it done = before I roll the next release. > Perhaps it will be good to use the system temporary directory instead? Agreed. > Beyond that, and without installing any particular handlers, rack = tests results in: >=20 > ruby 1.9.3p327 (2012-11-10) [i386-mingw32] > 583 tests, 1761 assertions, 4 failures, 2 errors >=20 > ruby 2.0.0dev (2012-11-10 trunk 37612) [i386-mingw32] > 583 tests, 1761 assertions, 5 failures, 2 errors >=20 > ruby 2.0.0dev (2012-11-10 trunk 37612) [x64-mingw32] > 583 tests, 1761 assertions, 5 failures, 2 errors >=20 > See gist for full details: >=20 > https://gist.github.com/4054864 >=20 > Do you think tests are incorrectly assuming details of the platform = (test is not prepared to run on Windows) or do you think the failures = are possible rack issues with Windows? The multipart tests involve loading binary fixtures from the repo. They = will become corrupted if you use autocrlf in your git settings (I VERY = VERY strongly recommend against such settings for exactly this reason). = It's also possible we're missing some binary file modes in the read = calls, or there are additional encoding concerns. I'll take a deeper = look. Again an issue on Github will help me remember to do so. > How would you like to proceed? I wanted to get the conversation going = before invest more time on this. This is excellent feedback, if you have more time to prepare some = patches, that's awesome, but if you just want to create some issues with = this information, that's great too. Many thanks >=20 > Thank you. > -- > Luis Lavena >=20