[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: MinGW vs. setlocale
From: |
Doug Evans |
Subject: |
Re: MinGW vs. setlocale |
Date: |
Thu, 19 Jun 2014 06:53:17 +0200 |
On Jun 11, 2014 3:14 PM, "Ludovic Courtès" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> skribis:
>
> >> [...]
> > UNRESOLVED: i18n.test: string mapping: string-locale-downcase Turkish
> >
> > I don't know why these fail.
>
> Note that “UNRESOLVED” is not a failure; it means “we can’t run this
> test here, so skip it.”
Hi.
At least in GDB, I generally infer UNRESOLVED to mean "action needed" (could be test harness bug or some such), whereas if a test can't be run in a particular config I see UNSUPPORTED which I infer to mean "no action needed".
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, (continued)
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/11
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/11
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/12
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/12
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/15
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/21
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/21
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/21
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/21
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/22
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale,
Doug Evans <=
- Re: MinGW vs. setlocale, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/19
MinGW vs. c-api.test, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/09
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Neil Jerram, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, David Kastrup, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, dsmich, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/10
Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/10