On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 10:14:15PM -0500, Craig A. Berry wrote:
> The $^X discussion led me to discover that we had $Config{_exe}
> missing, and fixing that led me to discover that we really shouldn't
> be using it the way which_perl does because the Perl we use to run
> the test suite doesn't
The $^X discussion led me to discover that we had $Config{_exe}
missing, and fixing that led me to discover that we really shouldn't
be using it the way which_perl does because the Perl we use to run
the test suite doesn't have any extension at all. The patch below
fixes the second of two com
On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 06:32:43PM -0500, Craig A. Berry wrote:
> The $^X discussion has led me to the discovery that we have the wrong
> variable name in %Config for the extension on an executable file.
Thanks, applied.
> --- configure.com;-0Tue May 28 18:12:55 2002
> +++ configure.com
The $^X discussion has led me to the discovery that we have the wrong
variable name in %Config for the extension on an executable file.
--- configure.com;-0Tue May 28 18:12:55 2002
+++ configure.com Thu May 30 17:49:12 2002
@@ -5082,7 +5082,7 @@
$ WC "PERL_API_VERSION='" + api_version
On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 04:22:40PM -0500, Craig A. Berry wrote:
> We wer failing these because 'blib/lib' doesn't look like 'blib.lib]'.
Thanks, applied.
> --- lib/blib.t;-0 Thu May 30 09:32:45 2002
> +++ lib/blib.t Thu May 30 16:04:08 2002
> @@ -57,7 +57,12 @@
> is( @INC, 3, '@INC now h
We wer failing these because 'blib/lib' doesn't look like 'blib.lib]'.
--- lib/blib.t;-0 Thu May 30 09:32:45 2002
+++ lib/blib.t Thu May 30 16:04:08 2002
@@ -57,7 +57,12 @@
is( @INC, 3, '@INC now has 3 elements' );
is( $INC[2],'../lib', 'blib added to the front of @INC' );
-
Craig Berry wrote:
!>+to temporarily work around the problem, or if you are brave
!>+and do not might the possibility of breaking IPv6 addresses,
!
!I think that should read "mind the possibility" -- otherwise looks good.
Indeed it should read as you've re-worded it. Amusing
that the spell che
At 1:57 PM -0400 5/30/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>+to temporarily work around the problem, or if you are brave
>+and do not might the possibility of breaking IPv6 addresses,
I think that should read "mind the possibility" -- otherwise looks good.
--
Cr
Craig Berry wrote:
!Good show, Peter, though I think that should read "third party TCP/IP
!stack" rather than vendor If we want to be more
!generous-sounding, we could say it's an incompatibility between the
!vendor-supplied socket library and the third party IP stack.
Hunter Goatley has a
>>%DCL-W-IVVERB, unrecognized command verb - check validity and spelling
>> \MOST\
>>%DCL-W-IVVERB, unrecognized command verb - check validity and spelling
>> \MORE\
>>%DCL-W-IVVERB, unrecognized command verb - check validity and spelling
>> \LESS\
>
>You're stuck with those unless you install one
10 matches
Mail list logo