I've been able to successfully compile and install Bytes::Random::Secure with Perl 5.6.2 on an Ubuntu 12.04 and a Fedora 16 machine. As mentioned, the latest Scalar::Util 1.27 fails the t/dualvar.t test, and CPAN::Meta::Requirements also fails to pass tests. My Fedora machine's 5.6.2 uses Scalar::Util 1.26 and CPAN::Meta 2.112621.
On my Fedora machine, applying this one-line patch to Configure: http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2007/07/msg126333.html and adding "-lm" at the end of LLIBPERL in Makefile.SH makes perl 5.6.2 compile and pass tests. I had the bright idea of trying to turn on the test reporter for 5.6.2, but File-pushd, even back to 0.32, won't pass tests for me, so no go. I'm trying hard to keep 5.6.2 in the testing loop for my modules, but I don't think it has much longer to go. I'm kind of looking forward to not caring, especially in code that deals with 64-bit ints. By the way, I've had the same question, usually with regard to a particular O/S. On some of my modules, the test results just stop coming in, and I'm left wondering what I messed up, with no information about what might have happened. In the Solaris case it made me start up a couple Solaris smokers of my own, but they use a different configuration than Jost's and run just fine. I did find activestate's logs can be useful to see what happened with their builds (e.g. http://code.activestate.com/ppm/Bytes-Random-Secure). Dana On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:41 AM, David Cantrell <da...@cantrell.org.uk>wrote: > On 31/01/2013 20:34, David Oswald wrote: > >> I know there probably aren't many people still smoke-testing with Perl >> 5.6.x, and was just wondering if that is the reason I haven't seen any >> pre-5.8 smoke tests for Bytes::Random::Secure, or if perhaps I have >> missed some detail in the distribution that is preventing testing on >> Perl 5.6. >> >> I believe we've established 5.6 compatibility as of >> Bytes::Random::Secure version 0.20 and newer. >> >> So the question is: Is this a case of "Patience is a virtue", or of >> "You forgot to XYZ."? >> > > http://deps.cpantesters.org/?**module=Bytes%3A%3ARandom%3A%** > 3ASecure&perl=5.6.2&os=any+OS<http://deps.cpantesters.org/?module=Bytes%3A%3ARandom%3A%3ASecure&perl=5.6.2&os=any+OS> > > indicates that the problem is with the most recent Scalar::Util or > CPAN::Meta, both of which look like they consistently fail. > > My own 5.6.2 smoker has discarded test reports for every version of > Bytes-Random-Secure - and a DISCARD as opposed to PASS or FAIL indicates > that there's a problem with dependencies. And that's even with it using > cp5.6.2an for resolving deps. In all honesty, I'd not bother with trying > to support 5.6.2 these days. Even with cp5.6.2an, most stuff won't build, > because older versions of XS modules hate modern gcc and libraries. Hell, > even *perl* 5.6.2 won't build and pass its tests with a modern compiler and > libraries, at least not on Linux. > > The very few people who do still use 5.6.2 are used to having to fettle > stuff by hand to make it work. > > If you've not heard of cp5.6.2an ... http://cpxxxan.barnyard.co.uk. It's > awesome, if I may say so myself. > > -- > David Cantrell | > http://www.cantrell.org.uk/**david<http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david> > > THIS IS THE LANGUAGE POLICE > PUT DOWN YOUR THESAURUS > STEP AWAY FROM THE CLICHE >
