On 10/16/07, Paul Cochrane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 15/10/2007, Bernhard Schmalhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Paul Cochrane via RT schrieb: > > > On Fri Nov 17 14:17:18 2006, particle wrote: > > > > > >> ~ all but one test have been adapted for and moved to t/codingstd/ > > >> ~ remaining test is for not-yet-approved codingstd item > > >> > > > > > > The remaining test complains about more than one '.' in a filename and > > > filenames which don't conform to the 8.3 format. > > I have talked to some VMS people at YAPC::EU 2007. > > For them the "more than one '.'" issue was a real problem, that > > they had to work around before even creating a Makefile. > > Attached is a test for multiple dot filenames. We have several such > files in the source[1], so I don't know how useful such a test is, and > whether or not it is worth changing the files around. I could handle > having a restriction on the number of dots in filenames but I don't > think we would be able to handle an 8.3 filename format restriction. > Anyway, a decision would be good about this, then I can clean up and > close a couple of annoying tickets. > what we need to do more generally is verify that parrot is buildable and installable on our target operating systems. citing the PDD01 draft:
=head2 Target Platforms The ultimate goal of Parrot is portability to more-or-less the same platforms as Perl 5, including AIX, BeOS, BSD/OS, Cygwin, Darwin, Debian, DG/UX, DragonFlyBSD, Embedix, EPOC, FreeBSD, Gentoo, HP-UX, IRIX, Linux, Mac OS (Classic), Mac OS X, Mandriva, Minix, MS-DOS, NetBSD, NetWare, NonStop-UX, OpenBSD, OS/2, Plan 9, Red Hat, RISC OS, Slackware, Solaris, SuSE, Syllable, Symbian, TiVo (Linux), Tru64, Ubuntu, VMS, VOS, WinCE, Windows 95/98/Me/NT/2000/XP/Vista, and z/OS. Recognizing the fact that ports depend on volunteer labor, the minimum requirements for the 1.0 launch of Parrot are portability to major versions of Linux, BSD, Mac OS X, and Windows released within 2 years prior to the 1.0 release. As we approach the 1.0 release we will actively seek porters for as many other platforms as possible. i'd be quite satisfied with a test that verifies that the minimum filename requirements are met for the list of currently targeted operating systems, accompanied by a note in the test (and either a TODO ticket or an item in the porters guide) that this test must be modified and satisfied to address the requirements of all supported platforms. ~jerry
