Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
FS#39934 - [ack] 2.12 fails check
Attached to Project:
Community Packages
Opened by Roman Neuhauser (roman-neuhauser) - Friday, 18 April 2014, 12:48 GMT
Last edited by Florian Pritz (bluewind) - Tuesday, 20 May 2014, 08:45 GMT
Opened by Roman Neuhauser (roman-neuhauser) - Friday, 18 April 2014, 12:48 GMT
Last edited by Florian Pritz (bluewind) - Tuesday, 20 May 2014, 08:45 GMT
|
DetailsDescription:
i get multiple complaints about File::Next::dir and File::Next::files, the test run concludes with Files=86, Tests=910, 170 wallclock secs ( 0.76 usr 0.15 sys + 155.05 cusr 10.82 csys = 166.78 CPU) Result: FAIL Failed 53/86 test programs. 669/910 subtests failed. it's the same whether i build locally or in http://build.opensuse.org/ (see the attached logfile or https://build.opensuse.org/build/home:roman-neuhauser:arch-community/Arch_Extra/x86_64/ack/_log). Additional info: * package version(s) * config and/or log files etc. Steps to reproduce: |
This task depends upon
ack.log
FWIW I also don't get those errors:
[ 65s] Can't exec "perldoc": No such file or directory at Makefile.PL line 89.
[ 65s] Use of uninitialized value $file_next_filename in scalar chomp at Makefile.PL line 90.
[ 65s] Use of uninitialized value $file_next_filename in sprintf at Makefile.PL line 92.
however, i'm getting a different failure with naked makepkg, see attached buildlog.