Re: Latest version of perl?

On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 01:07:00AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 22:26:50 +0000, Alex Waugh wrote:
> > If you still get problems, with programs compiled with the fixed version
> > of UnixLib (ie that supplied with gcc 2.95.4 release 1 or later), then
> > you should submit a bug report to the gcc bug database or mailing
> > list with as much detail as possible.
> 
> I still get problems with perl 1.15ß (only), though I don't use the
> serial port any longer. This is a version from January 2001, so the
> callback UnixLib bug wasn't fixed yet.

Please understand what I am saying.
I can recompile perl from the perl sources easily, but not against new
UnixLib.
I can recompile again tonight, but it's not going to be against the new
UnixLib. Making that happen would take more time than I currently have free.

On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 11:45:29AM +0000, James Taylor wrote:
> On Fri 29 Mar, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 10:24:08 +0000, James Taylor wrote:
> > > 
> > > How would I get a copy?
> > 
> > I can mail it to you if you want (but not before tonight).
> 
> That's kind but don't you think we should ask Nick first?
> 
> I'm going to be away for the weekend so I guess I'll
> have to pick up this conversation again on Tuesday.
> 
> > > Shouldn't it be up on flirble.org for everyone?
> > 
> > I don't know.
> 
> Nick? Are you reading this?

Yes I'm reading this.
Offhand I forget why it was marked as beta - I think I wasn't confident that
I'd actually solved the bug in the correct way, and I'd done in from my
current source tree that may have had tinkering in it that wasn't
documented. (or possibly not had introduced bugs)
It wasn't built from a known clean source tree.

Nicholas Clark
-- 
Even better than the real thing:	http://nms-cgi.sourceforge.net/