From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: bug#31868: Test failure for GnuCash 3.3 (previously 3.0) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2019 09:09:42 +0100 Message-ID: <8736qbfpkp.fsf@elephly.net> References: <87a7rurxoa.fsf@gmail.com> <87zhskdtiq.fsf@gmail.com> <20190102074558.GA23211@macbook41> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50672) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gebbN-0007cV-Hw for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2019 03:10:10 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gebbI-0002XO-1y for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2019 03:10:09 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:39302) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gebbH-0002Uw-63 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2019 03:10:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gebbG-0007Ct-UV for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2019 03:10:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-reply-to: <20190102074558.GA23211@macbook41> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Efraim Flashner Cc: 31868@debbugs.gnu.org, Maxim Cournoyer Efraim Flashner writes: > On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 03:15:09PM -0500, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: >> Using latest Guix, GnuCash 3.3 fails its test suite by only one test: >>=20 >> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- >> [fail] line:644, test: dual amount column, first transaction correct >> transaction.scm/display options >> -> expected: ("01/03/18" "$103 income" "Root.Asset.Bank" "$103.00" "$10= 3.00") >> -> obtained: ("01/03/19" "$103 income" "Root.Asset.Bank" "$103.00" "$10= 3.00") >> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- >>=20 > > Haven't looked at the test yet, is this a 'yyyy' vs 'YYYY' error in ISO86= 01? To me this looks like the test assumes that we=E2=80=99re running it in 201= 8, not $current_year. --=20 Ricardo