octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: bug-38236.tst (was Re: HAVE_FFTW macro)


From: Julien Bect
Subject: Re: bug-38236.tst (was Re: HAVE_FFTW macro)
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 11:10:24 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130308 Thunderbird/17.0.4

On 18/03/2013 10:22, c. wrote:
On 18 Mar 2013, at 08:31, address@hidden wrote:

Are these "bug-xxxxx" code hunks to be reminders of some sort (in which
case, why not use xtest instead of test)?  Or are they something to
check recently fixed bugs to make sure everything is working out in the
field?
I don't know for other "bug-xxxxx" code hunks but I added bug-38236.tst as
I intended to work on fixing the bug myself and needed that to test my progress.

After a few attempts, though, I am a bit lost about how to fix that bug as
I do not have much experience with the parser internals, so I would appreciate
help/pointers regarding this one.

I don't think this should be marked as an expected failure as it is a 
regression:
it seems to work fine on the stable branch.

I am unable to use "hg bisect" to locate the changeset that broke this 
functionality
as I cannot build versions before January 2013 on my system (OSX 10.8), maybe 
someone
could help me locate the changeset doing an "hg bisect" on Linux?

What is the oldest bad changeset that you have located ?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]