On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 09:31:10AM -0500, David Holland wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 11:08:38PM -0800, Bill Stouder-Studenmund wrote:
>  > > I think the problem is that most of the sh tests check things
>  > > sufficiently obscure that most people aren't willing to venture an
>  > > opinion regarding whether it's sh or a failing test that's wrong.
>  > > Then, the set of people willing to fiddle inside sh probably isn't
>  > > that large either.
>  > 
>  > The test harness should tell us if the test fails or not. So it shouldn't 
>  > matter if I know nothing about a subsystem, I can tell if a test passed or 
>  > not. Obviously, if I know nothing about a subsection, I can't really fix 
>  > it. But if the test passed before I made a change and failed after, well, 
>  > there we go. :-)
> 
> Right, but if you just go and run it and it fails, you don't really
> know whether it's because the code is wrong or the test is wrong.

Either way - you need to investigate, or ask somebody who knows the area
to investigate.

	-is
-- 
seal your e-mail: http://www.gnupg.org/