Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 13:26:37 -0500 From: AlanE <alane@geeksrus.net> To: Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.ORG>, Trevor Johnson <trevor@jpj.net>, AlanE <alane@geeksrus.net>, Anders Andersson <anders@hack.org>, Alexis Georges <floating_in_space_@hotmail.com>, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: PLEASE test phoenix 0.4_3, just committed. Message-ID: <20021104182637.GA4787@wwweasel.geeksrus.net> In-Reply-To: <20021104130319.GN197@vectors.cx> References: <20021104113126.GL197@vectors.cx> <20021104063249.Q50593-100000@blues.jpj.net> <20021104130319.GN197@vectors.cx>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 05:03:19AM -0800, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>>> (11.04.2002 @ 0404 PST): Trevor Johnson said, in 1.0K: <<
>> I see what you mean. I think Alan is trying to make it possible, but it
>> isn't quite complete yet. You probably noticed that he has set it up to
>> install the p5-File-Spec port for people who have an old version of Perl
>> that doesn't come with File/Spec.pm. Perl 5.6.1 has its own File::Spec,
>> which is (apparently) new enough for Phoenix's purposes, yet I had runtime
>> problems before after building with Perl 5.6.1 (I didn't see those error
>> messages) and you had runtime problems now when building after 5.005_03.
>> Now it's just a simple matter of finding where the problems come from. :-)
>>> end of "Re: XML Parsing error with Phoenix 0.4.2" from Trevor Johnson <<
>
>I can't diagnose much more tonight as it's 4:45a and I'm really tired
>and sick of watching phoenix re-extract again and again ::P
>
>I've found a difference that may point in a useful direction:
>
>When 5.005_03 is used, XP_UNIX doesn't get defined. However, it does
>when 5.8.0 is used.
That's a clue. I have committed an update to 0.4_3, which defines
XP_UNIX for both the configure and the make. I have downgraded my
system to 5.6.1 and am testing here (can you say 2 hour build?); I
would appreciate other people testing this as well.
When reporting results, we need to know:
1. Base perl or port.
2. If port, did you do the command "use.perl port"?
3. If port, WHICH port?
4. Results, both configure/build anomolies and runtime glitches,
separated out into those two categories.
Send results to phoenix@geeksrus.net.
And now for the readin' of the rules. Bruce?
Rule #1. NO POOFTERS!
Rule #2. No more flaming about what version of perl is required or
what packages are required. If I made a legitimate mistake,
tell me. Otherwise, I'm sick and tired of people yelling at
me because of the decisions I take trying to make this
thing work for as many people as possible with as little
disruption to their systems as possible. DO NOT YELL AT THE
GUYS WHO ARE TRYING TO HELP YOU! If you have a difference
of opinion, not fact, then either (1) express it in such a
way as to not be offensive or (2) send it to /dev/null. OK?
Rule #3. NO POOFTERS!
Rule #4. Nobody is to mistreat the abos in any way, or if there's anybody
watching.
Rule #5. NO POOFTERS!
Rule #6. There is NOOOO Rule number six,
Rule #7. NO POOFTERS!
That concludes the reading of the rules. And now, Father Bruce here will
administer a short blessing:
"Our Lord, we beseech thee, have mercy on our faculty. Amen."
--
Alan Eldridge
Unix/C(++) IT Pro for 20 yrs, seeking new employment.
(http://wwweasel.geeksrus.net/~alane/resume.txt)
KDE, KDE-FreeBSD Teams (http://www.kde.org, http://freebsd.kde.org/)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021104182637.GA4787>