[PATCH] test case fixes for Solaris

[Danek Duvall]

Matt Mackall wrote:

> On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 13:50 -0700, Danek Duvall wrote:
> > # HG changeset patch
> > # User Danek Duvall <danek.duvall at oracle.com>
> > # Date 1377115773 25200
> > # Node ID 5e7ec26663958bc8fc51ee3ab517274268b4f498
> > # Parent  6ac206fb6f27492a98f46bbff090407ee1b1de72
> > test case fixes for Solaris
> > 
> > Solaris versions of grep, diff, tail, and sed are different from the GNU
> > versions, causing some test cases to fail.  Work around these differences
> > in OS-independent ways.
> 
> Horrors. How did these persist so long?

Because it's been a long time since I've done an upgrade of Mercurial in
Solaris, and I haven't been running the bits in between myself (and I guess
no one else is running the tests on Solaris, or cares).  That's largely due
to the need each time to upgrade this internal extension that we have, and
fix up the man pages to work with the Solaris *roff tools, which is a
tedious process, but I've made some changes to my build process that should
make the latter significantly easier.

I do want to set up automated nightly builds on Solaris, but it's been low
on my priority list.

> I think we probably shouldn't accept these without corresponding checks
> in contrib/check-code.py otherwise these will just be recurring problems
> that people on more mainstream Unices won't notice. Please separate out
> each class of breakage into a separate patch and include a corresponding
> check.

Okay.  Can I consider this confirmation that the workarounds I used were
appropriate?  I considered submitting some check-code fixes to find these,
but had some questions:

  - I know that GNU head and tail at some point in the past started
    disallowing args like "-8" and +8", and required the use of -n, but
    then I think backed off of that change.  So I'm not sure what the right
    thing is here.

  - I have no idea how to catch the problem in test-parse-date.t, since the
    contextual link between the missing newline and the sed that might not
    be able to recognize the last line of a file without it is tenuous.  Is
    that something we can just leave to more frequent testing?

> Also, please start your patch summaries with a relevant keyword, like
> "solaris:".

Sure.

Thanks,
Danek