On Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 10:43 PM, Kee Hinckley wrote:
Well, there's always this disgusting solution.
:
eval exec '`which perl` -S $0 $@'
if ($running_under_some_shell);
print STDERR Hello World\n;
foreach $arg (@ARGV) {
print STDERR Arg: $arg\n;
}
On Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 07:13 , Morbus Iff wrote:
#! /usr/bin/perl
#! /usr/local/perl
In the default Perl 5.6.0, it's located at /usr/bin/perl. With a default
install of Perl 5.8.0, it's installed into /usr/local/bin/perl, but also
/usr/bin/perl, allowing all scripts to function
I could be totally off base, but doesn't the env utility provide
functionality to solve this issue? I don't use env so I could be
wrong, but I -thought- that I had read somewhere that
#!/usr/bin/env perl
Would evaluate to the perl environment variable (which it is assumed
would point to
On Thursday, August 15, 2002, at 03:12 PM, drieux wrote:
so all I really want to know is
what is the canonical orthodox perl way
as executed in the canonical orthodox apple way?[4]
The orthodox perl way is laid down in the hints file for your favorite
(most
despised
On Thursday, August 15, 2002, at 03:53 PM, drieux wrote:
On Thursday, August 15, 2002, at 06:21 , Kee Hinckley wrote:
[..]
Of course this kind of solution is inherently dangerous given that
/usr/bin/perl and /usr/local/bin/perl may be different versions for
good reasons, and letting
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 09:18:24AM -0400, Erik Price wrote:
I could be totally off base, but doesn't the env utility provide
functionality to solve this issue? I don't use env so I could be wrong,
but I -thought- that I had read somewhere that
#!/usr/bin/env perl
The existance of, and
On Thursday, August 15, 2002, at 06:55 , Kay Röpke wrote:
On Thursday, August 15, 2002, at 03:12 PM, drieux wrote:
so all I really want to know is
what is the canonical orthodox perl way
as executed in the canonical orthodox apple way?[4]
The orthodox perl way is laid
On Thursday, August 15, 2002, at 07:03 , Kay Röpke wrote:
[..]
As 'developers' are a degenerated bunch of animals, they normally
keep their pack close to them.
What I mean is: their home directory.
a useful strategy, and a reasonable assertion about
developers in general... 8-)
[..]
You
On Thursday, August 15, 2002, at 07:53 AM, drieux wrote:
This approach also saves on the problem of using scripts that
were originally rigged with
#!/usr/bin/perl
#!/usr/local/bin/perl
Python programmers use this a lot, but it works equally well with Perl:
#!/usr/bin/env
On Thursday, August 15, 2002, at 11:53 PM, drieux wrote:
I can understand why 'developers' will want to have
'multiple instances of perl' floating around on
their machine - and one way would be to do this
with the split between the prefix /usr/local and /usr.
{ I would argue against such a
On Friday, August 16, 2002, at 12:00 PM, Rich Michaela wrote:
Actually this is not very reasonable at all, unless you have a
different
definition of production than I. The only sane way to run a production
environment is a single version.
Why? I've described a scenario where it's not
On Friday, August 16, 2002, at 10:35 AM, drieux wrote:
I guess a part of the problem I have here is that it
is not clear how the separation say
#!/usr/bin/perl is going to become 5.8
#!/usr/local/bin/perl is the older 5.6.1
that we get what you are suggesting
Right, I
I just assumed some of you on this list have been given betas, golds or
full versions of OS X.2
so anyone know?
--
Mein bratwurst has a first name, it's F-R-I-T-Z. Mein bratwurst has a
second name, it's S-C-H-N-A-C-K-E-N-P-F-E-F-F-E-R-H-A-U-S-E-N
(OS X)
On Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 03:54 PM, Morbus Iff wrote:
I just assumed some of you on this list have been given betas, golds or
full versions of OS X.2
5.6.0, as before. There are whispers of a installing 5.8.0
article being released shortly after Jaguar is available.
I wonder if an
On Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 04:20 PM, ellem wrote:
I wonder if an upgrade will bring my Perl to 5.6.0 again (which
wouldn't be the worst thing that ever happened to my Perl install)
That depends on where you installed your copy.
If you overwrote the factory copy, then as upgrade will
On Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 04:53 , Sherm Pendley wrote:
On Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 04:20 PM, ellem wrote:
I wonder if an upgrade will bring my Perl to 5.6.0 again (which wouldn't
be the worst thing that ever happened to my Perl install)
That depends on where you installed
At 8:44 PM -0400 8/14/02, ellem wrote:
#! /usr/bin/perl
I mean if it's on a bumper sticker it has to be correct; no?
Traditional Perl pre-dates bumpers.
Now if you have a Perl baby-on-board sign, that's another matter.
--
Kee Hinckley - Somewhere.Com, LLC
http://consulting.somewhere.com/
Kee Hinckley wrote:
At 8:44 PM -0400 8/14/02, ellem wrote:
#! /usr/bin/perl
I mean if it's on a bumper sticker it has to be correct; no?
Traditional Perl pre-dates bumpers.
Now if you have a Perl baby-on-board sign, that's another matter.
I have really enjoyed the depth of discussion
#! /usr/bin/perl
#! /usr/local/perl
In the default Perl 5.6.0, it's located at /usr/bin/perl. With a default
install of Perl 5.8.0, it's installed into /usr/local/bin/perl, but also
/usr/bin/perl, allowing all scripts to function normally. In the overwrite
system breed of install, the new Perl
At 7:03 PM -0700 8/14/02, Robert D. Sharp wrote:
caused a dangerous thing. Thought, I have had the pleasure of
writing scripts on a Linux box (developmental) for Unix box
(production) and had to provide for changes in that very line from
one
#! /usr/bin/perl
to
#! /usr/local/perl
or back
20 matches
Mail list logo
