On Saturday, March 1, 2003, at 12:55 AM, Peter N Lewis wrote:
I did find that various MUD clients would not work because they tried
to link to perl and got hit with the binary incompatibility issue.
There was an Apple installer script that failed if /usr/bin/perl was
5.8.0, as well - I forget wh
On Friday, February 28, 2003, at 06:05 PM, stephen rouse wrote:
i take it installing 5.8 is a bad idea?
Installing it over your stock Perl is a bad idea. Installing it
somewhere safe - I prefer /opt - is perfectly harmless.
Actually, since I've done this, installing 5.8 over your stock perl
does
Yes indeedy - 5.6
Is it worth the 5.8?
on 2/28/03 5:23 PM, Gary Blackburn at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Friday, February 28, 2003, at 04:53 PM, Ari B Kahn wrote:
>
>> Trying to install SOAP on OS X 10.2.4
>> Even when I try it using the Makefile.pl I get the same error.
>> Any suggestions
On Friday, Feb 28, 2003, at 14:18 US/Pacific, Warren Pollans wrote:
[..]
I'm trying to work through recipe 9.16 in the cookbook - using
Apache::DB - although I'm not trying to use Apache::DB yet - just
trying to see how my stuff works when I start apache with "httpd -X -f
path-to-configfile". T
On Friday, February 28, 2003, at 06:05 PM, stephen rouse wrote:
i take it installing 5.8 is a bad idea?
Installing it over your stock Perl is a bad idea. Installing it
somewhere safe - I prefer /opt - is perfectly harmless.
sherm--
C programmers never die - they're just cast into void.
i take it installing 5.8 is a bad idea?
At 5:23 PM -0500 2/28/03, Gary Blackburn wrote:
Oddly enough I was using SOAP::Lite just today on my 10.2.4 box... I
had installed it under a previous OS X version, however. (Plus, I'm
one of those stupid people who's installed 5.8 over my stock Perl.)
On Friday, February 28, 2003, at 07:49 AM, Barry Jaspan wrote:
I guess this leaves it unclear what to do when a user double-clicks on
a .pl script
No, I'd say that's crystal clear - open the file in BBEdit. ;-)
sherm--
Heisenberg may have slept here.
On Friday, February 28, 2003, at 04:53 PM, Ari B Kahn wrote:
Trying to install SOAP on OS X 10.2.4
Even when I try it using the Makefile.pl I get the same error.
Any suggestions?
Will summarize ...
Thanks
--
Ari Kahn
http://damon.ib3.gmu.edu/~kahn
### CPAN output ###
Oddly enough I was using SO
Could someone help me with this please? I had sent this to the mod_perl list - where
it was suggested that I try here instead.
Who is responsible for putting dl_install_.al in place. The DynaLoader module is
installed.
Thanks,
Warren
Begin forwarded message:
Hello,
I'm trying to work th
Trying to install SOAP on OS X 10.2.4
Even when I try it using the Makefile.pl I get the same error.
Any suggestions?
Will summarize ...
Thanks
--
Ari Kahn
http://damon.ib3.gmu.edu/~kahn
### CPAN output ###
cpan shell -- CPAN exploration and modules installation (v1.63)
cpan> install SOAP::Lit
On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> A .pkg is specifically just a distribution of files to be installed
> using the Installer program. You can add pre- and post- actions to a
> package (which I should have done for Perl--update your .cshrc to add
> /usr/local/perl5-8 to the path).
I had to install:
PAR
Module::ScanDeps
File::Temp
Archive::Zip
Compress::Zlib
but not in that order. I used perl -MCPAN -e shell to download them all,
but did NOT take CPAN's word for what dependencies I was lacking. As far
as I can tell, CPAN on OS X always ends up thinking you need a bunch o
>modules you already have, not to mention trying to automatically upgrade
>your system perl 5.8. (Note: This behavior of CPAN's is why I had to
Get a new version of the CPAN module, and
you won't have the "upgrade perl" problem.
>Note that these should only need to be installed on the development
At 03:59 PM 2/28/2003, Morbus Iff wrote:
>>The option of using PAR to distribute perl apps on OS X came up on my
>>recent (slightly related) thread. I just installed it, and so far it
>>seems to work quite well and easily. The files it produces are
>>somewhat large, though:
>>
>>My real app (much
>The option of using PAR to distribute perl apps on OS X came up on my
>recent (slightly related) thread. I just installed it, and so far it
>seems to work quite well and easily. The files it produces are
>somewhat large, though:
>
>My real app (much larger than Hello, world) comes to about 1.9MB
The option of using PAR to distribute perl apps on OS X came up on my
recent (slightly related) thread. I just installed it, and so far it
seems to work quite well and easily. The files it produces are
somewhat large, though:
% pp -e 'print "Hello, world.\n"'
% ./a.out
Hello, world.
% ls -l a.o
On Friday, Feb 28, 2003, at 09:20 US/Pacific, Dan Sugalski wrote:
A way to do packaging would be good, though there are licensing issues
there that you don't have to deal with when using system-installed
code.
Would the easiest solution be to come up with a list of "basic" perl
modules and a
At 9:39 PM -0500 2/27/03, Sherm Pendley wrote:
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 08:01 PM, Daniel Stillwaggon wrote:
Any perl application could ship with all of the perls and modules
that it requires in its .pkg. Before installing, it would do a
quick query and find out which, if any, of the
On Thursday, Feb 27, 2003, at 08:22 US/Pacific, Riccardo Perotti wrote:
I just did a
perl -e 'print "$_\n" for @INC'
in Terminal and both "/Library/Perl" and "/Network/Library/Perl" are
listed
twice. Why?
about the only reasonablish reason I can think of would
be that they did not do a 'ver
On Friday, February 28, 2003, at 01:04 AM, Rich Morin wrote:
At 12:13 AM -0800 2/28/03, Michael Maibaum wrote:
FWIW, it seems likely that 5.8.0 will be in 10.3, though that isn't
certain. I have been told that it is what they would like to happen,
and barring any unforeseen problems we should see
Got me, Riccardo. I got doubling doubling as well, two different ways:
~% perl -e 'print "$_\n" for @INC'
/sw/lib/perl5/5.6.1/darwin
/sw/lib/perl5/5.6.1
/Library/Perl/darwin
/Library/Perl
/Library/Perl
.
~% perl5.6.0 -e 'print "$_\n" for @INC'
/System/Library/Perl/darwi
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 10:22 AM, Riccardo Perotti wrote:
I just did a
perl -e 'print "$_\n" for @INC'
in Terminal and both "/Library/Perl" and "/Network/Library/Perl" are
listed
twice. Why?
I dunno - it's just compiled that way. It certainly doesn't cause a
problem, though.
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 05:41 PM, Joe Davison wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2003, Jeff Lowrey wrote:
At 10:12 AM +1100 2/26/03, John Horner wrote:
How do I find out if it's 10.1.3 or 10.1.5 from the command-line?
[toothgnip:~] jeff% osascript -e 'tell application "Finder" to
version' osasc
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 07:01 PM, Daniel Stillwaggon wrote:
What about a system where perl modules and versions could be
registered in an easily parsable format like:
perl-install /usr/local
DBI::AnyData 1.0
etc, etc
The idea is that this *file* (stars indicate tentative) could conta
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 10:39 PM, Peter N Lewis wrote:
Another alternative, for something like CB is that you could have an
initial install you'd need to do for any CB app to run, and that would
be the big one, once that was done, everyone else could just have the
relatively small bi
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 04:13 PM, David Wheeler wrote:
Apple knows that some utilities are undocumented (and that some man
pages exist for utilities not actually included in the system).
They've made great strides getting it all consistent, but as you've
noticed, it's not quite perfe
I just did a
perl -e 'print "$_\n" for @INC'
in Terminal and both "/Library/Perl" and "/Network/Library/Perl" are listed
twice. Why?
Riccardo
--
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.riccardoperotti.com
Perhaps I am missing the boat on this, but to me the solution seems
simple. perl 5.6 and 5.8 are different. They are incompatible. You
cannot automatically migrate from one to the other in safe manner,
period.
You can, however, quite trivially have both installed. perl 5.6 is
/usr/bin/perl, /
On Tue, 25 Feb 2003, Jeff Lowrey wrote:
>
> At 10:12 AM +1100 2/26/03, John Horner wrote:
> >How do I find out if it's 10.1.3 or 10.1.5 from the command-line?
> >
>
> [toothgnip:~] jeff% osascript -e 'tell application "Finder" to
> version' osascript -e 'tell application "Finder" to version'
At 12:13 AM -0800 2/28/03, Michael Maibaum wrote:
FWIW, it seems likely that 5.8.0 will be in 10.3, though that isn't
certain. I have been told that it is what they would like to happen,
and barring any unforeseen problems we should see it.
Do you have an idea of the release schedule for 10.3?
-r
FWIW, it seems likely that 5.8.0 will be in 10.3, though that isn't
certain. I have been told that it is what they would like to happen,
and barring any unforeseen problems we should see it.
Michael
--
Michael Maibaum
internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]|http://mike.maibaum.org
voice: [h] (41
31 matches
Mail list logo
