Re: PAR::Packer 0.980 MSWin32 .par binary?

Dear Mark, thanks a lot for the instructions. It seems to have worked. can somebody please verify that this is the expected result? Your instructions were wonderful, I just had to go back once on the MinGW in

RE: :Packer segmentation fault with threads

I agree that with threads in use, we cannot do the cleanup with END since it hoses things. Leaving temp directories lying around isn't acceptable either, since you can quickly fill up /tmp that way. I think the windows approach of having the bootstrap process take care of cleaning things up is sa

RE: PAR::Packer 0.980 MSWin32 .par binary?

On Wed, 14 May 2008, Mark Dootson wrote: > > Hi, > > I think you are on your own building with MSVC 2008EE. I don't know if there > will be anyone else out > there using this that can help you. I think you would have to make > considerable amendments to the > current build process to accommodat

Re: libc version

Roderich Schupp wrote: > On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Dave Howorth > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Being lazy, I thought I'd try a different approach first. Since it seems >> that the initial problem is the dynamic linking of the embedded perl, I >> thought I'd try building a file without pe

RE: PAR::Packer 0.980 MSWin32 .par binary?

> >> I've reported my previous attempt at > >> > > > > the actual error was not in the listing, it is above the listing > > how do you mean "not in the listing"? be aware that you are > dealing with unfortunately error scrolled aw

Re: libc version

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Dave Howorth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Being lazy, I thought I'd try a different approach first. Since it seems > that the initial problem is the dynamic linking of the embedded perl, I > thought I'd try building a file without perl, and see if the one on the

Re: libc version

Roderich Schupp wrote: > Dave Howorth wrote: >> I don't see any pp options to build statically so I guess trying that >> would mean poking around with ld. I'll try that next. > > Yeah, if it would have been as simple as some option to pp I would > have mentioned it. > In fact, pp doesn't do any

Re: PAR::Packer 0.980 MSWin32 .par binary?

Hi, Mark Dootson wrote: I think you are on your own building with MSVC 2008EE. got the message, thanks. Your instructions help a lot and I'll switch to MinGW. It's on my todo list for tonight. I'll report back, hopefully success, though as Thomas Edison used to say: "I never failed. I just

Re: PAR::Packer 0.980 MSWin32 .par binary?

KONOVALOV, Vadim (Vadim)** CTR ** wrote: I've reported my previous attempt at the actual error was not in the listing, it is above the listing how do you mean "not in the listing"? be aware that you are dealing with a caveman tha

Re: PAR::Packer 0.980 MSWin32 .par binary?

Hi, I think you are on your own building with MSVC 2008EE. I don't know if there will be anyone else out there using this that can help you. I think you would have to make considerable amendments to the current build process to accommodate MSVC 2008EE and I'm not sure at all if you could satis

RE: PAR::Packer 0.980 MSWin32 .par binary?

> I've reported my previous attempt at > the actual error was not in the listing, it is above the listing, so unsurprisingly no-on ewas able to help. However if you'll install your C into the directory without spaces (e.g. "apps" i

Re: libc version

Dave Howorth wrote: > > readelf -s my.exe | grep GLIBC_2.3 > > That says: >171: 113 FUNCGLOBAL DEFAULT UND > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (6) As I supected :( > > If this produces any output, you're hosed - this executable simply will > not run > > on the production machine. In

Re: PAR::Packer 0.980 MSWin32 .par binary?

Hi guys, Mark Dootson wrote: If there are no takers by this evening, I shall build for 5.10 and 5.8 I just need to set up a 5.8 environment. I would like to try this as well but I'm a newbie, so please do it anyway as I am afraid you can not really rely on me (yet). I've reported my previou

Re: PAR::Packer 0.980 MSWin32 .par binary?

Hi Mark, Mark Dootson wrote: > If there are no takers by this evening, I shall build for 5.10 and 5.8 > I just need to set up a 5.8 environment. that's awesome, thanks a lot for your help! Best regards, Steffen

Re: libc version

Roderich Schupp wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Dave Howorth > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> myscript: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.3' not found (required by >> myscript) >> >> The production machine doesn't have any libc.so; it has /lib/libc.a > > It has /lib/libc.so.6 (as state

Re: PAR::Packer 0.980 MSWin32 .par binary?

Hi, If there are no takers by this evening, I shall build for 5.10 and 5.8 I just need to set up a 5.8 environment. Regards Mark Steffen Mueller wrote: Hi list, in the past, we usually supplied a binary of PAR::Packer for our Windows users. Could somebody build PAR::Packer 0.980 (when it h

PAR::Packer 0.980 MSWin32 .par binary?

Hi list, in the past, we usually supplied a binary of PAR::Packer for our Windows users. Could somebody build PAR::Packer 0.980 (when it hits your mirror) on Windows (win32, please no 64) using AS Perl or Strawberry as follows and send me the .par file per mail so I can upload it in my CPAN direc

Re: :Packer segmentation fault with threads

Hi Scott, hi list, Scott Stanton wrote: > I'm not familiar with Perl's threading model. Is it possible the END > block is being called for each thread? I can see how that might cause > segfaults if a memory mapped library is moved from its original location > while still in use. Some platforms

Re: PAR + PAR::Packer 0.979

Hi all, Steffen Mueller wrote: > I just released PAR and PAR::Packer 0.979 as well as Module::ScanDeps > 0.84. I broke the PAR::Packer test suite with some debugging code. If you force install the module, all is fine. I'll do a 0.980 release ASAP. Best regards, Steffen