Daniel Richard G. dixit: […] >but that's about it.
OK. >Note that "cc" isn't even the same type of compiler as xlc. The option >syntax is different/incompatible, for starters. It’s likely still an xlc frontend, as it’s detected as xlc. >I saw that you put in a change to use xlc on this platform, however, so >this should no longer be an issue. True. >> It’s used later on, but it could conceivably be optional. >> My perl-foo is not very good either though… I’ll try something. > >I remember seeing somewhere that it's possible to make a "use" fail non- >fatally. I think an eval was involved... Yeah, an eval and some added magic. We have that now. >Glad to help! Let me know if you want another go. OK, please do so… I’ll mail you a tarball preview version. >of that test, and the raw bytes therein, I would point out that the file >did go through an EBCDIC->ASCII conversion when I copied it out of the Yes, I expected that. I tried to fix a fair amount of the testcases already… well, let’s see what to make of it. Unexpectedly, I also managed to fix with not too much effort a case of where it tried to use 0x80 as flag, applied to things like '0', which of course went wrong (and was the likely cause for most of the ^G and ^L in the testsuite output). Thanks and goodnight, //mirabilos -- <ch> you introduced a merge commit │<mika> % g rebase -i HEAD^^ <mika> sorry, no idea and rebasing just fscked │<mika> Segmentation <ch> should have cloned into a clean repo │ fault (core dumped) <ch> if I rebase that now, it's really ugh │<mika:#grml> wuahhhhhh
