On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Charles Lane wrote:
> Did 7483 come out without a yfixer run? I know there were some link problems
> with S_syylex in 7463, but that was something different.
Sorry I should have said 7463. The kit before that was the one that I
thought that yfixer had not been run. The 7463 kit had the S_syylex
problem and Dan suggested that the fixer script had not been run. But the
Changes log would indicate that it had been run for the release of the
7463 kit.
> Hmm...it looks like Jarkko dropped the patch I submitted to fix that one;
> but there was some other patch to embed; I'll take a look at it.
I too might be missing something here since I don't recall an embed patch,
but I have been juggling messages from more than one mailing list
recently so I could be wrong :-)
> Good to hear that yfixer should be run "automatically" now. Would it
> be worth testing for perly_c.vms being up to date, even if it turns
> out to be a no-op 99.9% of the time? Considering that we've gotten
> bitten by this so many times before (and that the errors you get are
> *always* obscure) my inclination is to add the test.
I too am for putting the test into configure.com. I like the patch.
Peter Prymmer
