gnupg-2.0.19 test failures on GNU/Linux Red Hat 5.8 IA-64 (Itanium)

[W. Trevor King]

On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 09:46:39AM -0600, Nelson H. F. Beebe wrote:
> why do the encryption names prefix the PASS/FAIL reports?
> 
> In my view, that makes it harder to scan the output for problems. I
> sometimes do 100 to 150 different builds of single packages in
> multiple O/S and compiler environments, so test-report clarity matters
> to me.
> 
> I suggest that
> 
> 	PASS: DES CAST5 BLOWFISH AES AES192 AES256 TWOFISH CAMELLIA128 CAMELLIA192 CAMELLIA256 conventional.test
> 	FAIL: 3DES conventional-mdc.test
> 
> would be better.

The Git folks have a test suite that print TAP-formatted output [1]:

   1..4
   ok 1 - Input file opened
   not ok 2 - First line of the input valid
   ok 3 - Read the rest of the file
   not ok 4 - Summarized correctly # TODO Not written yet

If people want to change the test result format, you might as well use
a pre-existing specification ;).

[1]: http://testanything.org/

-- 
This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20120405/b777cbcb/attachment.pgp>