From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivered-To: chneukirchen@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.85.105 with SMTP id g9csp46528qez; Wed, 6 Feb 2013 18:02:12 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of rack-devel+bncBD75LW742ECRBI4WZSEAKGQE4JXNRQQ@googlegroups.com designates 10.49.84.167 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.49.84.167 Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of rack-devel+bncBD75LW742ECRBI4WZSEAKGQE4JXNRQQ@googlegroups.com designates 10.49.84.167 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rack-devel+bncBD75LW742ECRBI4WZSEAKGQE4JXNRQQ@googlegroups.com; dkim=pass header.i=@googlegroups.com X-Received: from mr.google.com ([10.49.84.167]) by 10.49.84.167 with SMTP id a7mr14381115qez.11.1360202532164 (num_hops = 1); Wed, 06 Feb 2013 18:02:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:x-received:received-spf :mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to: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; bh=YooExB/rUWDFOl4AQytRBdo3VbgvkE6aeKD8q9Q6ccI=; b=oqM1oYeyWvMoFt13ixPQd+UtkryGs4wiCp1UsM7v9kh/JFfYF9mAOodhQ1DuXXSQPw DB8Z8wOJB+jVPHUrj5g2rXw+xy+LaAwXvMAn4V00YB2NaAg5iyhAuAN8POnscBQWsARQ 6TTp+ng/p+apmIuSXHbJ8MWE+8ZcBPWk+AHcPFCapPbN5S0zfJrc+2P1sXnhK7d3omIL dut2uTpRYPdRpgI5faDHlG53Ca1i5jTEKDguYXDmEQh8nnwp0aTu3Zrasqf1zYmiXoee VxyEU8ELXB1hqNKNvgb6+qeJzq/8/bGsQMISj/xdgvOLY/v/00tVaLxBsUbgo2tS46/u knJQ== X-Received: by 10.49.84.167 with SMTP id a7mr2679959qez.11.1360202532054; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 18:02:12 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: rack-devel@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.49.28.102 with SMTP id a6ls618120qeh.91.gmail; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 18:02:11 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.52.69.167 with SMTP id f7mr10965384vdu.5.1360202531649; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 18:02:11 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.52.69.167 with SMTP id f7mr10965380vdu.5.1360202531633; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 18:02:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vb0-f45.google.com (mail-vb0-f45.google.com [209.85.212.45]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b1si6709423vdw.2.2013.02.06.18.02.11 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Feb 2013 18:02:11 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jftucker@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.45 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.45; Received: by mail-vb0-f45.google.com with SMTP id p1so1305143vbi.18 for ; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 18:02:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.58.206.99 with SMTP id ln3mr19938667vec.36.1360202531507; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 18:02:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.48.200 with HTTP; Wed, 6 Feb 2013 18:02:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <0693588c-1dac-4b09-bd4f-5441a6143d49@googlegroups.com> References: <0693588c-1dac-4b09-bd4f-5441a6143d49@googlegroups.com> Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 18:02:11 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Running rack tests on Windows (both 1.9.3 and 2.0.0) From: James Tucker To: rack-devel@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jftucker@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jftucker@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.45 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: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013cb966b68f8304d518d427 --089e013cb966b68f8304d518d427 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Provided your git settings are not modifying file data, you should be close to a green run now. On 11 November 2012 05:20, Luis Lavena wrote: > Hello, > > I've started to look into Rack (and its tests) on Windows just to ensure > things are running as much properly as possible. > > I found a few hardcoded values to temporary files (/tmp/rack_sendfile) > that is blocking spec_sendfile.rb from executing. > > Perhaps it will be good to use the system temporary directory instead? > > Beyond that, and without installing any particular handlers, rack tests > results in: > > ruby 1.9.3p327 (2012-11-10) [i386-mingw32] > 583 tests, 1761 assertions, 4 failures, 2 errors > > ruby 2.0.0dev (2012-11-10 trunk 37612) [i386-mingw32] > 583 tests, 1761 assertions, 5 failures, 2 errors > > ruby 2.0.0dev (2012-11-10 trunk 37612) [x64-mingw32] > 583 tests, 1761 assertions, 5 failures, 2 errors > > See gist for full details: > > https://gist.github.com/4054864 > > 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? > > How would you like to proceed? I wanted to get the conversation going > before invest more time on this. > > Thank you. > -- > Luis Lavena > > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Rack Development" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rack-devel+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. --089e013cb966b68f8304d518d427 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Provided your git settings are not modifying file data, yo= u should be close to a green run now.

<= br>
On 11 November 2012 05:20, Luis Lavena <l= uislavena@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,

I've started t= o look into Rack (and its tests) on Windows just to ensure things are runni= ng as much properly as possible.

I found a few hardcoded values to temporary files (/tmp= /rack_sendfile) that is blocking spec_sendfile.rb from executing.

Perhaps it will be good to use the system temporary directo= ry instead?

Beyond that, and without installing any particular hand= lers, rack tests results in:

ruby 1.9.3p327 (2012-= 11-10) [i386-mingw32]
583 tests, 1761 assertions, 4 failures,= 2 errors

ruby 2.0.0dev (2012-11-10 trunk 37612) [i386= -mingw32]
583 tests, 1761 assertions, 5 failures, 2 errors
<= /div>

ruby 2.0.0dev (2012-11-10 trunk 37612) [x64-m= ingw32]
583 tests, 1761 assertions, 5 failures, 2 errors

<= /div>
See gist for full details:


Do you think tests are incorrectly assuming detai= ls of the platform (test is not prepared to run on Windows) or do you think= the failures are possible rack issues with Windows?

How would you like to proceed? I wanted to get the conversation going = before invest more time on this.

Thank you.
<= div>--
Luis Lavena


--
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Rack Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to rack-devel+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 
--089e013cb966b68f8304d518d427--