On Sun, 15 Apr 2001, David Grove wrote:
> Add Solaris 8 1/01 to the list of OS's that have
> completely rejected 5.6, as I discovered last night,
This is quite unfair. Sun has supported perl nicely and Sun employees
have actively contributed to 5.6.0 and beyond. That Sola
On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 05:15:51PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> The analogous situation with p4->p5 wasn't so bad.
> People just kept their p4 binaries around for running
> those old scripts. No biggie.
Uggg. Do you remember how long it took FreeBSD to change
/usr/bin/perl from perl4 to perl5?
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>> Unless you can get at every single one of those and add a '-M5' switch,
>> then they aren't going to work. Which could be very bad indeed.
> The analogous situation with p4->p5 wasn't so bad. People just kept
> their p4 binaries a
Piers Cawley wrote:
> Unless
> you can get at every single one of those and add a '-M5' switch, then
> they aren't going to work. Which could be very bad indeed.
The analogous situation with p4->p5 wasn't so bad.
People just kept their p4 binaries around for running
those old scripts. No biggie.
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why? We don't ask this of any other compiler, so why ask it of perl?
> (You won't find this in a C, or Fortran, or Ada compiler...)
Yes, but my compiled C binaries in /usr/bin don't break when I upgrade
gcc. A binary is largely independent of its compil
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 08:23 PM 4/13/2001 -0700, jc vazquez wrote:
> > > On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Dave Storrs wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > We could then just add a -7 flag.
> > >
> > > Or, just use:
> > >
> > > #!/usr/bin/perl6
> > >
> >
> >To solve this versioning issue, is there
On Sun, 15 Apr 2001, David Grove wrote:
> The Perl 5 path is almost dead: adventurers and Win32 users are the
> vast majority using it at all.
Since when?
> Add Solaris 8 1/01 to the list of OS's that have completely rejected
> 5.6, as I discovered last night, and I'd imagine that there are mor
Given that Perl 5 internals post 5.004 caused the need for a rewrite
anyway, I'd imagine that this would be a particularly horrid idea. The
Perl 5 path is almost dead: adventurers and Win32 users are the vast
majority using it at all. Add Solaris 8 1/01 to the list of OS's that have
completely rej
