This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: who is using perl 5.8.0?
- From: "Gerrit P. Haase" <gp at familiehaase dot de>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 18:46:06 +0200
- Subject: Re: who is using perl 5.8.0?
- Organization: Esse keine toten Tiere
- References: <email@example.com>
Am Freitag, 13. September 2002 um 22:42 schriebst du:
>> > On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>> >> >> Are there no problems/bugs with perl-5.8.0?
>>> I am on Win98, and I ran ./build.sh and it seems to have stopped
>>> the problem of child processes I was having with perldoc.
>> Yep, I saw this too, remapping problems disappear after building
>> the program at the box where I want to use it (not done with perl
> I tried building perl on a completely vanilla full install of Cygwin
> on WinME with no other application running. I'm still getting the
> same error as before [sync_with_child] as soon as it starts the
> testing phase. Gerrit, I think I'm at my wits end. Nothing at all
> (blank) is being displayed in DrMingw when it crashes.
> Oh, BTW, perl-5.8 recognizes db3.1 as a valid db to build the db
> module against (FYI).
Fine, maybe I'll release a second perl-5.8 build linked against db3
the next days (no promises, my boss is back from vacation and we'll
have a lot of work the next time...)
> I spoke with Chuck the other day and he thinks it is *wrong* for
> perl to *require* rebasing. I completely agree, as perl is required
> for core functionality. Perhaps we should get Jarkko or Larry in on
> this discussion? ^^^added missing 'r'
No, I don't think that they can help that much. I helped Merijn to
build ptk because of the same problems with the ptk dll's. But we got
never problems with core perl modules dll's, well... we're all running
some kind of NT (4 or 5) or maybe XP. I'm still convinced that it is
a Windows <-> Cygwin problem. If it isn't possible to work around in
the Cygwin core, then a workaround in Cygwin setup is the next option,
rebasing of dll's like Stipe does it for Apache is the third
possibility, also a special flag to binutils ld to include rebasing in
the build stage would be nice, I'm not up to date with the rebase
developers discussion and I don't know where they want to integrate it,
but it needs to be included somewhere since it is already a never
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html