Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2012
David Golden said: > Thus... I said that -t/-T in a shebang on a taint-disabled perl should > not be fatal. Then a *.t could check %Config and skip or not. > > So... tests that have -t/-T for no good reason will just pass. Tests > that actually expect -t/-T so they can check for taint-handling will > fail (because no exception will be thrown), and those authors can then > add an appropriate %Config check or skip stanza to their tests, if > they are motivated to do so. So maybe -T should be fatal and -t not. And maybe -t could take precedence over -T, or maybe only if the -t is on the command line and the -T on the shebang line. Then the harness could supply -t instead of -T if the perl is taint-free.Thread Previous | Thread Next