Re: Not exactly a Perl question
I use vmware to test against Fedora-because that's what our hosting provider uses. That said, I dont really have any need to test the perl related stuff. Its more for other services. Works like a charm though. 4gb MacBook Pro. --- iPhoned
Re: Not exactly a Perl question
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 08:51:16AM -0400, Robert Hicks wrote: Do any of you use use VMWare or Parallels to test your stuff on other distros? Which did you pick to use and why? I use Parallels for both my CPAN-testers stuff and also for testing my own code on Linux and FreeBSD. I also test on Solaris (on a Sparc box) and NetBSD on Alpha. I use Parallels because VMware for Mac didn't exist at the time. I wish that Parallels could run OS X as a 'guest' OS. That Apple won't allow virtualisation is bloody annoying. -- David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice You are so cynical. And by cynical, of course, I mean correct. -- Kurt Starsinic
Re: Not exactly a Perl question
On 10/26/07, Robert Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do any of you use use VMWare or Parallels to test your stuff on other distros? Which did you pick to use and why? VMWare w/ CentOS5 as the OS. Mainly because I can take the VM and move it over to the VMWare server (the free one) instance that's running on one of our servers. Or give it to one of the other developer's who's not using OSX without hassle.
Re: Thanks Apple! You snubbed perl yet again!
On Oct 19, 2007, at 5:12 PM, Chris Devers wrote: On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 19, 2007, at 2:51 AM, Chris Devers wrote: On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can draw a picture for you: http://finkproject.org/ In which case, your real argument appears to be the Fink people don't seem to be doing what I need fast enough. In which case, the response is you should contribute to Fink then. Duly noted. I would like to try to do a unifier, a front end that searches all the various porting systems (fink, macports, darwinports.com) and gets the latest version of a package. [...] I, as a developer, should maintain the latest version of perl on my machines. I give in! Yes, if that's really what you need. I still think it isn't the end of the world to just work with the bundled version of Perl (along, of course, with whatever CPAN modules you need). It's not like 5.8.6 or 5.8.8 are such awful, archaic versions to work with in the first place. So target the release version, or do like everyone else that's concerned about this and install your own Perl. It's not hard to do, and it's really not that different than how things are on Debian. Yes it is. debian's packages are updated constantly, not just in point releases. So if there is a problem a new package is made available relatively quickly. Maybe my Debian experience is too limited then, but this seems like a slightly glossed over version of things to me. The last time I spent a lot of time with debian (roughly 2003-2005), it was still on 3.0/Woody. Yes, there was a constant stream of package updates, but IIRC they were all security patches, critical bugfixes (with a *really* conservative definition of critical -- merely braindead usability brokenness never seemed to be worth patching), etc. It seems like most of the updates we were getting were via backports.org rather than official updates to Woody itself. Maybe things have evolved since then, but at the time it seemed like if an update wasn't for security or a real showstopping bug (e.g. keeps the machine from booting, or a critical daemon from running), then it was seen as a mere features update and got deferred until 3.1/Sarge. If you wanted those features updates, you had to get them from backports or roll your own. Maybe as a backlash, I seem to remember that this is around when Ubuntu et al branched off to be a more current platform. Things have changed significantly. As an example, we have a tool in the debian-perl group that compares our version of a perl module with the module on CPAN. This is automated and is done daily. (http://pkg- perl.alioth.debian.org/qa/versions.html) This way we can see which modules need updating and do the update as part of our normal team work keeping perl fresh in debian. This seems like exactly the stance that we're talking about here, and as frustrating as it can seem, there are really good reasons to do things this way, not least being stability predictability for developers, who can assume confidently that release X is going to have Perl v.Y, etc. As far as Ubuntu is concerned, they just take a snapshot of debian and work out the bugs, freeze the code, and release it on a planned release date. Since it is a frozen version of debian and Ubuntu quickly becomes outdated in comparison with debian unstable, though they do issue updates for security and other bugs which they get from debian or initiate themselves. Stability is good, but elusive. Is a patched version less stable than an unpatched version? Most new versions of software are bug fixes of the same code that has been working anyway, maybe I shouldn't say most but we can agree it is many. Jeremiah
Re: Locale weirdness
Responding without thinking, but, On 平成 19/10/24, at 4:44, David Cantrell wrote: As some of you may know, I'm one of the cpan-testers. I recently sent a test failure for Log-Report-0.11 on OS X. The author is most puzzled about what's happening, and once I gave him a guest account he could play with, he found that ... What I found out, is that locale -a says that nl_NL exists, and /sw/share/locale/nl/glibc.mo is present. However, LANG=nl ls /xx is still in English. Don't know why. This seems rather odd. Anyone know what's going on? My memory is that Apple is not using the same locale mechanisms as most of the rest of the *nix world. [clickety-clackety] Hmm. Yeah, the LANG environment variable is not set in the default shell in my family account (Mac OS 10.4), which has Japanese at the top of the language list in the system preferences. I never have yet bothered figuring out why/how Mac OS makes the foreign language stuff work. (Not much interested, any more.) -- David Cantrell | Cake Smuggler Extraordinaire Repent through spending Joel Rees (waiting for a 3+GHz ARM processor to come out, to test Steve's willingness to switch again.)
Re: Not exactly a Perl question
Speaking of Solaris and Mac's and multiple OS environments. Solaris 10 is free for X86. It loads really easy in Parallels. There is even a web site where a Solaris Parallels image that is down loadable. Solaris 10 supports a virtualization called Zones (virtual Solaris server). This weekend on an Intel Mac we installed Solaris and setup a couple of Zones all running under Parallels. Each zone has its own IP and login like a regular OS. One zone for the database, one zone for the Web server, with the programming development on the Mac. Note: You need memory to do this. But it is free. You can download the Solaris image Parallels image at: http://www.sun.com/download/products.xml?id=461d6b7d Also checkout the blog: http://mysqldatabaseadministration.blogspot.com/2007/05/installing-solaris-10-on-mac-book-using.html To setup a Solaris zone, use the runbook posted at : http://www.logiqwest.com/dataCenter/Demos/RunBooks/Zones/createBasicZone.html David Cantrell wrote: On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 08:51:16AM -0400, Robert Hicks wrote: Do any of you use use VMWare or Parallels to test your stuff on other distros? Which did you pick to use and why? I use Parallels for both my CPAN-testers stuff and also for testing my own code on Linux and FreeBSD. I also test on Solaris (on a Sparc box) and NetBSD on Alpha. I use Parallels because VMware for Mac didn't exist at the time. I wish that Parallels could run OS X as a 'guest' OS. That Apple won't allow virtualisation is bloody annoying. -- Michael Barto Software Architect LogiQwest Inc. 16458 Bolsa Chica Street, # 15 Huntington Beach, CA92649 http://www.logiqwest.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel:714 377 3705 Fax:714 840 3937 Cell: 714 883 1949 'tis a gift to be simple This e-mail may contain LogiQwest proprietary information and should be treated as confidential.
