tensmekl@infonode.ingr.com (Kermit Tensmeyer) (04/06/91)
I ran Configure, make depend, make TEST and got these results | klt 154>perl TEST | base/cond......./base/cond.t: print: not found | ./base/cond.t: =: not found | ./base/cond.t: eq: not found | ./base/cond.t: ne: not found | ./base/cond.t: eq: not found | ./base/cond.t: ne: not found | ./base/cond.t: print: not found | ./base/cond.t: ==: not found | ./base/cond.t: !=: not found | ./base/cond.t: ==: not found | ./base/cond.t: print: not found | ./base/cond.t: print: not found | FAILED on test 0 | Failed a basic test--cannot continue. | | klt 155>cd base | /mnt/klt/src/perl/perl.4/t/base | | klt 158>../../perl *.t | 1..4 | ok 1 | ok 2 | ok 3 | ok 4 | When I ran each of the test's individually everything come out hunky-dory. Any Clues? -- Kermit Tensmeyer | Intergraph Corporation UUCP: ...uunet!ingr!tensmekl | One Madison Industrial Park INTERNET: tensmekl@ingr.com | Mail Stop LR23A2 AT&T: (205)730-8127 | Huntsville, AL 35807-4201
guy@b11.ingr.com (Guy Streeter) (04/06/91)
tensmekl@infonode.ingr.com (Kermit Tensmeyer) writes: >I ran Configure, make depend, make TEST and >got these results >| klt 154>perl TEST >| base/cond......./base/cond.t: print: not found >| ./base/cond.t: =: not found ... >| >When I ran each of the test's individually everything come out hunky-dory. >Any Clues? Yes. You ran it on a system whose interpretation of the #! magic number is, let's say, "incomplete". Those error messages come from the shell, trying to interpret perl code. I can't fault the configure script, because the #! does work in some cases, but not all (popen()ed scripts, for example, won't work). You need to go into config.sh and change it so it doesn't think #! works. -- Guy Streeter streeter@ingr.com
kgallagh@digi.lonestar.org (Kevin Gallagher) (04/06/91)
In article <1991Apr5.172457.10599@infonode.ingr.com> tensmekl@infonode.ingr.com (Kermit Tensmeyer) writes: >I ran Configure, make depend, make TEST and >got these results > >| klt 154>perl TEST >| base/cond......./base/cond.t: print: not found >| ./base/cond.t: =: not found >| ./base/cond.t: eq: not found >| ./base/cond.t: ne: not found [...etc.] >| ./base/cond.t: print: not found >| ./base/cond.t: print: not found >| FAILED on test 0 >| Failed a basic test--cannot continue. [stuff deleted] >When I ran each of the test's individually everything come out hunky-dory. > >Any Clues? You did not identify the version of Unix you are running and the hardware you are running on. This would proved helpful. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kevin Gallagher kgallagh@digi.lonestar.org OR ...!uunet!digi!kgallagh DSC Communications Corporation Addr: MS 152, 1000 Coit Rd, Plano, TX 75075 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
mac@kpc.com (Mike McNamara) (04/15/91)
In article <guy.670894399@guy> guy@b11.ingr.com (Guy Streeter) writes: >tensmekl@infonode.ingr.com (Kermit Tensmeyer) writes: > >>I ran Configure, make depend, make TEST and >>got these results > >>| klt 154>perl TEST >>| base/cond......./base/cond.t: print: not found >>| ./base/cond.t: =: not found >... >>| >>When I ran each of the test's individually everything come out hunky-dory. > >>Any Clues? > >Yes. You ran it on a system whose interpretation of the #! magic >number is, let's say, "incomplete". Those error messages come from >the shell, trying to interpret perl code. I can't fault the configure >script, because the #! does work in some cases, but not all (popen()ed >scripts, for example, won't work). > >You need to go into config.sh and change it so it doesn't think #! works. > Actually, perhaps not. On my system, base/cond.t and friends start with #! ./perl instead of #! /bin/perl I do not know if that is how they were shipped, or if running Configure changed them to that way. I copied the perl distribution from uunet, my machine is a Stardent 3000. In actuality, this could be a feature. Usually when you are running TEST, you haven't yet installed perl; hence the test scripts should look in a non standard place. The directory layout is as follows: perl/ perl/perl ... perl/t/ perl/t/TEST ... perl/t/base/ perl/t/cmd/ So how I naively ran the tests was to cd to t and type ./TEST. If I had stayed in the perl directory, and typed t/TEST, then #! ./perl would have worked. Or, a symbolic link could have been made from t/perl to ../perl Just a layout problem... >-- >Guy Streeter >streeter@ingr.com -- +-----------+-------------------------------------------------------------------+ |mac@kpc.com| Increasing Software complexity lets us sell Mainframes as | | | personal computers. Carry on, X windows/Postscript/emacs/CASE!! | +-----------+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
lwall@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov (Larry Wall) (04/19/91)
In article <1991Apr14.235128.9435@kpc.com> mac@kpc.com (Mike McNamara) writes:
: So how I naively ran the tests was to cd to t and type ./TEST.
: If I had stayed in the perl directory, and typed t/TEST, then
: #! ./perl
: would have worked.
Only on t/TEST itself. TEST immediately chdirs to t, so base/whatever.t looks
for perl in the t directory.
: Or, a symbolic link could have been made from
: t/perl to ../perl
Which is precisely what "make test" does. The reason that the tests
look for perl in t/ is that it gives you the option of pointing the
symlink at some other perl to test, such as the currently installed one.
Larry