RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

Charles Lane wrote: > Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > At 12:19 PM 2/22/00 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>Jordan Henderson wrote: > >> > >> > Thanks. I guess I thought that a lot of these patches you > >> > mentioned would have been folded into .660. I'll investigate > >> > ea

Re: [PATCH 5.5.660]VMS build patches

> Well, damn. What was wrong with it? (I think the diffutils port I've got's > busted) Dunno, patch wasn't very talkative about its motives. -- $jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/ # There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'. # It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen

Re: [PATCH 5.5.660]VMS build patches

At 10:38 PM 2/23/00 +0200, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: >Dan Sugalski writes: > > The following patches are needed to get 5.5.660 building on VMS. It's > still > > got some test errors (openpid.t hangs the test harness, and some of the > > other tests still fail) but at least it's mostly function

Re: [PATCH 5.5.660]VMS build patches

Dan Sugalski writes: > The following patches are needed to get 5.5.660 building on VMS. It's still > got some test errors (openpid.t hangs the test harness, and some of the > other tests still fail) but at least it's mostly functional. (Possibly > completely functional, depending on what's wr

[PATCH 5.5.660]VMS build patches

The following patches are needed to get 5.5.660 building on VMS. It's still got some test errors (openpid.t hangs the test harness, and some of the other tests still fail) but at least it's mostly functional. (Possibly completely functional, depending on what's wrong in the tests) Hopefully this

RE: leaking channels (was RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?)

Absolutely. I just wanted to be sure I wasn't looking into an area covered by a recent patch. > -Original Message- > From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000 2:24 PM > To: Jordan Henderson; Craig A. Berry; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: leaking

RE: leaking channels (was RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?)

At 02:13 PM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: >OK, that's unrelated to mbx channels. And it definitely fixes a truly nasty bug, which isn't a bad thing. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski

RE: leaking channels (was RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?)

OK, that's unrelated to mbx channels. > -Original Message- > From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000 2:16 PM > To: Craig A. Berry; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: leaking channels (was RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?) > > > At 01:02 PM 2/23/

Re: leaking channels (was RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?)

At 01:02 PM 2/23/00 -0600, Craig A. Berry wrote: >At 12:56 PM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: > >I'm not sure there's a leak involved here, as all channels > >are eventually deassigned. Hmmm... wasn't there a patch > >that someone showed how to get Perl to leak channels recently? > >Yup, s

leaking channels (was RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?)

At 12:56 PM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: >I'm not sure there's a leak involved here, as all channels >are eventually deassigned. Hmmm... wasn't there a patch >that someone showed how to get Perl to leak channels recently? Yup, see

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

At 01:12 PM 2/23/00 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: >At 12:56 PM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: > >>Is there a per-process limit on channels? It's not an >>Authorize setting and I don't see a SYSGEN parameter. > >Sure. Fillm does it. with a default set by the SYSGEN parameter PQL_DFILLM and a

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

At 12:56 PM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: > > From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > At 12:14 PM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: > > >It seems that it would be easy to "fix" this, as the call in > > >VMS.C, safe_popen(), has a mode argument for r/w. It seems that > > >

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

> -Original Message- > From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000 12:32 PM > To: Jordan Henderson; 'Craig A. Berry'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build? > > > At 12:14 PM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: > > > Fro

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

At 12:14 PM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: > > From: Craig A. Berry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >What could perl possibly do with an unsuccessful EOF write to the >mailbox anyway? Beats me. Part of me thinks that it ought to be noted. (Maybe a warning) >It seems that it would be easy to "

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

At 12:16 PM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: > > From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > At 10:39 AM 2/23/00 -0600, Craig A. Berry wrote: > > >At 10:56 AM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: > > > >It appears that the pipe is being opened as a RW mbx (new > > to some recent > >

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

> -Original Message- > From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000 11:49 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build? > > > At 10:39 AM 2/23/00 -0600, Craig A. Berry wrote: > >At 10:56 AM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

> -Original Message- > From: Craig A. Berry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2000 11:40 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build? > > > At 10:56 AM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: > >I've gotten this to work by putting a IO

Re: My today list

At 10:50 AM 2/23/00 -0600, Craig A. Berry wrote: >At 11:28 AM 2/23/00 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: > >Today I'm spending beating the heck out of 5.5.660. My goal is to get a > patch kit that gets a perl built with @CONFIGURE "-des" building > properly. I'm hoping for other stuff (like being able t

Re: My today list

At 11:28 AM 2/23/00 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: >Today I'm spending beating the heck out of 5.5.660. My goal is to get a patch kit >that gets a perl built with @CONFIGURE "-des" building properly. I'm hoping for other >stuff (like being able to build with both thread methods), but that's secondar

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

At 10:39 AM 2/23/00 -0600, Craig A. Berry wrote: >At 10:56 AM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: > >It appears that the pipe is being opened as a RW mbx (new to some recent > version > >of OpenVMS), so the perl has READ channels and WRITE channels on the mbx. I > >could be wrong about this,

My today list

Just to let everyone know... Today I'm spending beating the heck out of 5.5.660. My goal is to get a patch kit that gets a perl built with @CONFIGURE "-des" building properly. I'm hoping for other stuff (like being able to build with both thread methods), but that's secondary. A vanilla, PERL_

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

At 10:56 AM 2/23/00 -0500, Jordan Henderson wrote: >I've gotten this to work by putting a IO$M_NOW on the WRITEOF: > > retsts = sys$qiow(0,chan,IO$_WRITEOF|IO$M_NOW,iosb, > 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0); > >But, I'm not happy with this now. The problem is that the sta

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

If you are making changes to VMS.C for the safe_popen() stuff, could you test my change to my_pclose() that I hope to get in soon. It seems to work and pass the tests, but it's an area related to the work you're doing, so I'd like to get a consolidated fix here (or perhaps your work would obviate

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

At 10:16 AM 2/23/00 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Meanwhile, I have a "Perl language" question that I hope someone can answer... >in the t/lib/dprof.t test, there's a glob: > sort() >that fails on VMS...I modified it to: > sort(,) >and then it works; apparantly the glob

FW: beta2 is available

Yesterday I offered to coordinate the patches necessary to build the current dev release (then .650) to work on VMS. Now, it appears I won't have time for this project as they are looking for a stable release by Feb 29th. I just wanted to make sure that nobody was depending on me to help with th

RE: Patches for 5.5.650 to build?

Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At 12:19 PM 2/22/00 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>Jordan Henderson wrote: >> >> > Thanks. I guess I thought that a lot of these patches you >> > mentioned would have been folded into .660. I'll investigate >> > each and see if they are and I'll sear

beta2 is available

It's at all the usual places and also here: ftp://ftp.linux.activestate.com/pub/staff/gsar/APC/5.5.660/perl5.5.660.patch.gz ftp://ftp.linux.activestate.com/pub/staff/gsar/APC/5.5.660/perl5.5.660.tar.gz This release is primarily bug fixes. _All_ of the badness identified by Purify have b