On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 11:41 PM, Clemens Lang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I didn't follow the Perl discussion closely for time reasons, but there's
> a patch for a perl port in https://trac.macports.org/ticket/42855 I'd like
> to commit.
>
> Can somebody explain the current status? Should I delay perl port
Hi,
I didn't follow the Perl discussion closely for time reasons, but there's
a patch for a perl port in https://trac.macports.org/ticket/42855 I'd like
to commit.
Can somebody explain the current status? Should I delay perl port updates?
Or, even simpler, would somebody take over the ticket and
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 09:00:09AM +0200, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Dan Ports wrote:
> > Longer-term, we need to decide whether to go to a single perl.
> > Personally, I'm in favor of this. But it's clearly going to involve a
> > lot of work (even if it'll save us mo
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Dan Ports wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 08:19:27AM -0700, David Evans wrote:
>> As Daniel has said, no point in changing things that are going to go away so
>> we need to get a consensus on where we want to go with this. My input here
>> would be this:
>>
>> *
On Aug 12, 2014, at 5:25 PM, Dan Ports wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 08:19:27AM -0700, David Evans wrote:
>> As Daniel has said, no point in changing things that are going to go away so
>> we need to get a consensus on where we want to go with this. My input here
>> would be this:
>>
>> *
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 08:19:27AM -0700, David Evans wrote:
> As Daniel has said, no point in changing things that are going to go away so
> we need to get a consensus on where we want to go with this. My input here
> would be this:
>
> * make the necessary changes to perl5.18 to work as perl5.
Another thing that I noticed: running installer in trace mode reveals
many missing basic dependencies in basically all modules.
Typical example:
Warning: An activity was attempted outside sandbox:
/opt/local/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.18/ExtUtils/Liblist.pm
Warning: An activity was attempted outside
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 6:43 PM, David Evans wrote:
> On 8/12/14 9:30 AM, Frank Schima wrote:
>>
>> I see no reason to change perl 5.16 or lower because they are already
>> working. Let’s just look forward to 5.18 and 5.20. Even if 5.18 is a lame
>> duck already.
>>
>> For me, the only thing hold
On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:30 AM, Frank Schima wrote:
> For me, the only thing holding up moving to perl 5.20 is p5.20-pdo, 5.20-wx
> and possibly a few others that work fine with p5.16.
I meant p5-pdl here.
-Frank
___
macports-dev mailing list
macp
On 8/12/14 9:30 AM, Frank Schima wrote:
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:03 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:20 AM, David Evans wrote:
On 8/12/14 8:06 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 9:56 AM, Mojca Miklav
On Aug 12, 2014, at 8:45 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>>>
>>> Other than that I can definitely create a new branch to simplify
>>> testing and add the same patch to all perl versions. Bu
> Is there data coming in through mpstats that could help with this
> decision? What is the distribution of perl installs by version?
No helpful data from mpstats at the moment. Don't bother checking.
--
Clemens Lang
___
macports-dev mailing list
mac
At 8:32 AM -0700 8/12/14, David Evans wrote:
On 8/12/14 8:23 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:20 AM, David Evans wrote:
On 8/12/14 8:06 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Aug 12, 2014, at 9:56 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
Now about 5.8-5.16: my idea was to initially set the INC path
On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:03 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:20 AM, David Evans wrote:
>>> On 8/12/14 8:06 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Aug 12, 2014, at 9:56 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> Now about 5.8-5.16: my idea wa
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:20 AM, David Evans wrote:
>> On 8/12/14 8:06 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 9:56 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
Now about 5.8-5.16: my idea was to initially set the INC path for
those versions in su
On 8/12/14 8:23 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:20 AM, David Evans wrote:
>>
>> On 8/12/14 8:06 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 9:56 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
Now about 5.8-5.16: my idea was to initially set the INC path for
those versions in such a way
On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:28 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 11:25 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> that's pretty much why we're in the situation we are now - we just continue
>>> with the current setup because it's 'easier'. Someone puts a bunch of
>>> effort into making things
On Aug 12, 2014, at 11:25 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> that's pretty much why we're in the situation we are now - we just continue
>> with the current setup because it's 'easier'. Someone puts a bunch of effort
>> into making things work with a newer (but never the current) perl, and then
>> d
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:22 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 11:19 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm just saying, it's a /lot/ of effort to do this for p5.8-p5.20 ports
>>> when it could be reduced (somewhat) b
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:20 AM, David Evans wrote:
>
> On 8/12/14 8:06 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 9:56 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>>> Now about 5.8-5.16: my idea was to initially set the INC path for
>>> those versions in such a way that it would include
>>> "5.16.3/darwin-th
On Aug 12, 2014, at 11:19 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>>
>> I'm just saying, it's a /lot/ of effort to do this for p5.8-p5.20 ports when
>> it could be reduced (somewhat) by just working on p5.20... (and
>> deprecating/removing everything
On 8/12/14 8:06 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 9:56 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>> Now about 5.8-5.16: my idea was to initially set the INC path for
>> those versions in such a way that it would include
>> "5.16.3/darwin-thread-multi-2level 5.16.3
>> 5.16.1/darwin-thread-multi-2level
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
> I'm just saying, it's a /lot/ of effort to do this for p5.8-p5.20 ports
> when it could be reduced (somewhat) by just working on p5.20... (and
> deprecating/removing everything else).
Also worth noting: the current Perl release cycle is
On 8/12/14 7:56 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:43 PM, David Evans wrote:
>> I'd be happy to help with this. It's true that many ports are outdated
>> version-wise (even ones that have already been ported to p5.20)
>> and my recent experience suggests that many need updated
>
On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>
> I'm just saying, it's a /lot/ of effort to do this for p5.8-p5.20 ports when
> it could be reduced (somewhat) by just working on p5.20... (and
> deprecating/removing everything else).
It seems to me an order of magnitude more effort to r
On Aug 12, 2014, at 11:12 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:08 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>
>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 11:06 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>>
But I'm unable to figure out how to patch Perl to do that. The INC
path additions seem to be ignored.
>>>
>>> Why
On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:08 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 11:06 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> But I'm unable to figure out how to patch Perl to do that. The INC
>>> path additions seem to be ignored.
>>
>> Why handle <= 5.16 differently than >= 5.18?
>
> why handle any of th
On Aug 12, 2014, at 11:06 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> But I'm unable to figure out how to patch Perl to do that. The INC
>> path additions seem to be ignored.
>
> Why handle <= 5.16 differently than >= 5.18?
why handle any of them?
maybe just spend the time fixing any ports that don't build w
On Aug 12, 2014, at 9:56 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>
> Now about 5.8-5.16: my idea was to initially set the INC path for
> those versions in such a way that it would include
> "5.16.3/darwin-thread-multi-2level 5.16.3
> 5.16.1/darwin-thread-multi-2level 5.16.1
> 5.16.0/darwin-thread-multi-2level
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:43 PM, David Evans wrote:
>
> I'd be happy to help with this. It's true that many ports are outdated
> version-wise (even ones that have already been ported to p5.20)
> and my recent experience suggests that many need updated
> dependencies as well.
>
> To make things man
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>>
>> Other than that I can definitely create a new branch to simplify
>> testing and add the same patch to all perl versions. But the request
>> to wait with updates a bit (unless it's real
On 8/12/14 7:15 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 3:02 PM, David Evans wrote:
>> On 8/12/14 5:34 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 4:15 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
Hi,
I would like to do a massive commit with changes in perl modules.
I attached
On Aug 12, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>
> Other than that I can definitely create a new branch to simplify
> testing and add the same patch to all perl versions. But the request
> to wait with updates a bit (unless it's really really really needed)
> still stands.
you could create
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 3:02 PM, David Evans wrote:
> On 8/12/14 5:34 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 4:15 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I would like to do a massive commit with changes in perl modules.
>>>
>>> I attached a patch to
>>>https://trac.macports.org/ticket
On 8/12/14 5:34 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 4:15 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to do a massive commit with changes in perl modules.
>>
>> I attached a patch to
>>https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43480
>> two days ago, but it is no longer suitable as such
On Aug 12, 2014, at 4:15 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to do a massive commit with changes in perl modules.
>
> I attached a patch to
>https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43480
> two days ago, but it is no longer suitable as such out-of-the-box
> since there were a bunch of
Hi,
I would like to do a massive commit with changes in perl modules.
I attached a patch to
https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43480
two days ago, but it is no longer suitable as such out-of-the-box
since there were a bunch of changes in perl modules (including
changing exactly the files that I
37 matches
Mail list logo
