Re: Re: svn: /php/php-src/ branches/PHP_5_4/Zend/zend_execute_API.c trunk/Zend/zend_execute_API.c
| From: | Ferenc Kovacs | Date: | Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:01:21 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: svn: /php/php-src/ branches/PHP_5_4/Zend/zend_execute_API.c trunk/Zend/zend_execute_API.c | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-57797@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>wrote:
> Hi!
>
>
> We're in violent agreement. I don't think it's the right approach at
>> all — the right fix is to either fall back on ITIMER_REAL or come up
>> with some other approach on OS X — but I'm trying to come up with a
>> stopgap for 5.4.0 to make sure the test is XFAILed where we already
>> know it fails as part of the "let's actually make the test suite
>> meaningful" push, since we've been living with this in 5.3 for ages
>> anyway and I don't think this is anywhere near critical enough to
>> tinker with 5.4 during a code freeze.
>>
>
> I think it's meaningful right now - we have a bug there on Mac and that's
> exactly what the test shows, only we don't have a fix for it on 5.4.0. I'm
> not sure what's the "official" policy is for XFAILs, or whether it exists
> at all, but I'd say if we intend to fix the bug ASAP (as opposed to in
> undetermined future) then we probably shouldn't do XFAIL. But we could
> adopt another policy if anyone suggest something that makes sense.
I think you are aware of this, but maybe it can be useful for others:
http://zoomsplatter.blogspot.com/2008/06/why-xfail.html
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu