Michael G Schwern wrote on 16 December 2004 23:06
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 12:59:00PM -, Orton, Yves wrote:
> > Ah, sorry. I didnt understand. Im just curious if i alter
> this file this
> > will affect all "make dist" commands?
>
> Only if that module doesn't have its own MANIFEST.SKIP.
O
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 12:59:00PM -, Orton, Yves wrote:
> Ah, sorry. I didnt understand. Im just curious if i alter this file this
> will affect all "make dist" commands?
Only if that module doesn't have its own MANIFEST.SKIP.
> Is there any chance the default could have ".bak" added in fu
> Not Test::More's MANIFEST.SKIP. The system's default MANIFEST.SKIP.
> ExtUtils::MANIFEST.SKIP.
>
> Run "perldoc -m ExtUtils::MANIFEST.SKIP" and see if it looks like either
of
> the urls above.
Ah, sorry. I didnt understand. Im just curious if i alter this file this
will affect all "make dist"
> Perhaps you've got a damaged default MANIFEST.SKIP. Check what
> "perldoc -m ExtUtils::MANIFEST.SKIP" looks like. It should
> look like this.
>
>
http://search.cpan.org/src/MSCHWERN/ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.24/lib/ExtUtils/MAN
IFEST.SKIP
>
> Not like this.
> http://search.cpan.org/src/MSCHWERN/E
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 12:03:52PM -, Orton, Yves wrote:
> > Perhaps you've got a damaged default MANIFEST.SKIP. Check what
> > "perldoc -m ExtUtils::MANIFEST.SKIP" looks like. It should
> > look like this.
> >
> http://search.cpan.org/src/MSCHWERN/ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.24/lib/ExtUtils/MAN
>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (on 16
December 2004 16:45:01 +1100), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Savige) wrote:
>Steve Hay wrote:
>> is even worse: 1 second again on 5.8.6/perl-malloc versus 56
>> seconds on 5.8.4/system-malloc!
>
>I'm pretty sure realloc() is the culprit here.
>A common trick used b
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 01:06:36PM -, Orton, Yves wrote:
> Primary key fingerprint: B484 04B8 E9D5 93A2 5CA8 F1AA 4F82 E2DC 2C3F
> 3F34
> ==> SKIPPED CHECKING 'Makefile'! (run Makefile.PL to ensure its integrity)
> <===
Ok, talked to Autrijus.
But what's that "SKIPPED CHECKING" th
Steve Hay wrote:
> And this program (500,000 small extensions to a string):
>
> my $a = '';
> my $start = time;
> for my $i (1 .. 50) {
> print "$i\n" if $i % 1000 == 0;
> $a .= '.' x 20;
> }
> printf "OK (%d seconds)\n", time - $start;
>
> is even worse: 1 second again on 5.8.6/perl-malloc
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 01:06:36PM -, Orton, Yves wrote:
> Also Schwern, ive been trying to get it to build from the zip file linked
> above. The first time I build i get the following test failure:
>
> t\00signature.WARNING: This key is not certified with a
> trusted signature!
> Not quite. I'm saying: "Unless you need fork you're probably
> better off using a perl without PERL_IMPLICIT_SYS" [on Win32,
> obviously]. There's no problem with having ithreads enabled;
> it's PERL_IMPLICIT_SYS that requires perl's malloc to be disabled.
Got it. Ok, sorry to be so thick.
> Your patch needs to account for PERL_IMPLICIT_SYS too like
> t/op/fork.t does, as Schwern just pointed out.
Ok, ill look into that test to see how it works.
> I should have mentioned that rather than just "ithreads" in my mail.
> PERL_IMPLCIT_SYS is, in fact, also the reason that I don't bu
Orton, Yves wrote:
>>Your patch needs to account for PERL_IMPLICIT_SYS too like
>>t/op/fork.t does, as Schwern just pointed out.
>>
>>
>
>Ok, ill look into that test to see how it works.
>
>
>
>>I should have mentioned that rather than just "ithreads" in my mail.
>>PERL_IMPLCIT_SYS is, in
Michael G Schwern wrote:
> http://svn.schwern.org/svn/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
> or
> svn://svn.schwern.org/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
> or
> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/src/Test-Simple-0.54.tar.gz
> or
> a CPAN near you.
Thanks, bleadperl upgraded (as change #23654).
> http://svn.schwern.org/svn/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
> or
> svn://svn.schwern.org/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
> or
> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/src/Test-Simple-0.54.tar.gz
> or
> a CPAN near you.
Should the t/fork.t tests should still be skipped on Win32? Win32 Perl has
been able to fork since at lea
Orton, Yves wrote:
>>http://svn.schwern.org/svn/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
>>or
>>svn://svn.schwern.org/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
>>or
>>http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/src/Test-Simple-0.54.tar.gz
>>or
>>a CPAN near you.
>>
>>
>
>Should the t/fork.t tests should still be skipped on Win32? Win32 Perl ha
Orton, Yves wrote:
>>Yves Orton wrote:
>>
>>
>>
http://svn.schwern.org/svn/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
or
svn://svn.schwern.org/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
or
http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/src/Test-Simple-0.54.tar.gz
or
a CPAN near you.
>>>Should
> Yves Orton wrote:
>
> >>http://svn.schwern.org/svn/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
> >>or
> >>svn://svn.schwern.org/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
> >>or
> >>http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/src/Test-Simple-0.54.tar.gz
> >>or
> >>a CPAN near you.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Should the t/fork.t tests should still be skipped on
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 12:23:46PM -, Orton, Yves wrote:
> > http://svn.schwern.org/svn/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
> > or
> > svn://svn.schwern.org/CPAN/Test-Simple/trunk
> > or
> > http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/src/Test-Simple-0.54.tar.gz
> > or
> > a CPAN near you.
>
> Should the t/fork.t tests
18 matches
Mail list logo
