[log4perl-devel] resend: Log::Dispatch-2.08 on win32

[Viner, D. <dv...@ya...>]

hi all,

I've been trying to reach dave rolsky with this question... it seems like
log::dispatch version 2.07 and 2.08 fail on windows ...
http://testers.cpan.org/show/Log-Dispatch.html#Log-Dispatch-2.08

anyone here have the inside scoop on log::dispatch? 

thanks
dave

>  -----Original Message-----
> From: 	Viner, David  
> Sent:	Tuesday, December 23, 2003 10:56 AM
> To:	'au...@ur...'
> Subject:	Log::Dispatch-2.08 on win32
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I've been trying to build and run the tests for Log::Dispatch-2.08 on
> win32, but it fails.   The problem is in test 128 in t/01-basic.t which
> tests the chmodded permissions of a log file.  The problem is that on
> windows 0777 is equivalent to 0666 ( i think ).  In other words, this
> script:
> 
> #!/usr/local/bin/perl -w
> use strict;
> umask(0000);
> my $f= "test-chmod.tmp";
> open(F,">$f") or die("Can't open $f");
> print F "HI";
> close(F);
> 
> my $mode = (stat($f))[2]
>         or die "Cannot stat $f: $!";
> my $mode_string = sprintf( '%04o', $mode & 07777 );
> print "MODE: $mode_string\n";
> 
> chmod(0777,$f);
> 
> my $mode2 = (stat($f))[2]
>         or die "Cannot stat $f: $!";
> my $mode_string2 = sprintf( '%04o', $mode2 & 07777 );
> print "MODE: $mode_string2\n";
> 
> 
> exit;
> 
> Will output the following:
> MODE: 0666
> MODE: 0666
> 
> I'm not a win32 expert, but this small change to the test file will make
> it work:
> # 129 - 131 - would_log
> {
>     my $dispatch = Log::Dispatch->new;
> 
>     $dispatch->add( Log::Dispatch::File->new( name => 'file1',
> 					      min_level => 'warning',
> 					      filename => './would_test.log'
> ) );
> 
>     ok( !$dispatch->would_log('foo'),
>         "will not log 'foo'" );
> 
>     ok( ! $dispatch->would_log('debug'),
>         "will not log 'debug'" );
> 
>     ok( $dispatch->would_log('crit'),
>         "will log 'crit'" );
> 
>     unlink './would_test.log'
> 	or diag( "Can't remove ./would_test.log: $!" );
> }
> 
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> dave