Skip to content

Conversation

@ludovic-tc
Copy link
Contributor

@ludovic-tc ludovic-tc commented Nov 1, 2025

This PR adds a test for the /bin/yes script.

I hope this may be considered useful even though 'yes' is a very simple program. My intention was partly to complete an easy task with a view to hopefully making more substantial contributions in future.

I have attempted to write it cogently and adapt it to the house style, but suspect I have come up short on both counts.

I could not find a standing dev branch so have targeted master, but can easily target a different branch if desired.

Should this humble contribution is of interest to the project, I would be honoured to receive any and all feedback, whether detailed or e.g. just 'go back and look at these guidelines again' or 'run perltidy with this config'.

In particular, I will quite understand if you would prefer this rebased into a single commit.

I have run it with prove from my forked repo's root, and it seemed to play well with the other tests, but do let me know if I have missed some complete howlers.

Best wishes and thanks.

Runs yes as child process with parent reading ten lines.
May be run on alternative yes programs for comparison.
@github-actions github-actions bot added Priority: low get to this whenever Status: needs verification issue needs to be verified Type: bug an existing feature does not work labels Nov 1, 2025
@ludovic-tc
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hmm – looks like the Appveyor ubuntu2004 build failed! That's a surprise ... I'm guessing the child process got blocked somehow. I specifically wrote it to perform a unidirectional read so I didn't expect that to be a problem.

Copy link
Owner

@briandfoy briandfoy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test looks good, but I think you have an extra file in this commit. Did you mean to include t/yes/yes?

t/yes/yes Outdated
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
#!/usr/bin/env perl
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Did you mean to commit this file?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hello brian, many thanks. I certainly did not! What a howler. Fix imminent.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

File removed.

@briandfoy briandfoy added Status: changes requested adjust the pull request as noted in comments and removed Status: needs verification issue needs to be verified labels Nov 3, 2025
@briandfoy
Copy link
Owner

I'll give you about a week to respond, and failing that I'll fix up the pull request and merge it.

@briandfoy briandfoy added the Status: stalled something is blocking progress label Nov 4, 2025
@briandfoy briandfoy merged commit d65ab33 into briandfoy:master Nov 7, 2025
1 check was pending
@github-actions github-actions bot added Status: accepted The fix is accepted and removed Status: stalled something is blocking progress Priority: low get to this whenever labels Nov 7, 2025
@briandfoy briandfoy added Type: testing testing, that is not an existing test bug and removed Status: changes requested adjust the pull request as noted in comments Type: bug an existing feature does not work labels Nov 7, 2025
@briandfoy
Copy link
Owner

This will be part of the next release, which might be a bit. Thanks,

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Status: accepted The fix is accepted Type: testing testing, that is not an existing test bug

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants