I've been trying to build the more recent snapshots (with more VMS
patches in them), if only because I am running 5.6.0 in production as
of right now. I am doing only straightforward things, so I am not too
worried, but I would feel much better to be running 5.7.0.
John Peacock
Jordan Henderson wrote:
>
> I'm shamed by Peter's diligence.
>
> Is anyone else out there building those "nightly"
> snapshots as a sanity check?
>
> Sometimes, I fear that VMSPerl is going under from being
> under manned, but then people like Peter, Craig, Dan and
> the two Charleses give me some hope.
>
> I guess we all need our role models to live up to!
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jarkko Hietaniemi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 3:35 PM
> > To: Peter Prymmer
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: not OK, 6919 on Alpha VMS V 7.1 w/ DECC 6.0-001
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 12:30:19PM -0700, Peter Prymmer wrote:
> > >
> > > In order to build the miniperl from the 6919 kit I had to use a
> > > configure.com patched with the patch I sent in yesterday:
> > >
> > >
> > http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/vmsperl/2000-08/msg00149.html
> >
> > Thanks, applied.
> >
> > --
> > $jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
> > # There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
> > # It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
> >
