Do not reply to this via email (we are currently unable to handle email
responses and they get discarded). You can add comments to this bug at
gnome-perl | Gtk2 | Ver: unspecified
------- Comment #9 from Behdad Esfahbod 2006-11-24 21:07 UTC -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > So, maybe you can look at the test to see what it's doing?
> Symmetrically, should I suggest you to look into the code of my
> AppsFromScratch while I'm still alive and well in case of problems
> with my code ?
> I think it's best when developers themselves look into their code
> - ultimately we all benefit.
> For example, if I start looking into the failing test, I won't be able
> to spend the time on developing and debugging my code.
> I think each of us is more efficient with his/her own code than with
> somebody else's, so we all will be more productive dealing as much as
> possible with our own code.
Right, but it's not Pango at all. I did take a second look at my ChangeL=
between 1.14.7 and 1.14.8 and found no reason whatsoever to break a test.=
would have been more than happy to look at the code if it was in gtk+. B=
with the Perl bindings, that's not as easy as you think. I don't know Pe=
never looked at our Perl bindings, and have no idea about AppsFromScratch=
You are observing the failure, and you can pinpoint it to a single line t=
causing the change fairly easily, and copy it in the bug. FWIW, the Make=
you attached are not really helpful. It may be if you attach the test ca=
that is failing, or give a URL to it.
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=3Demail