> On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:06:18 +0200, demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 5/26/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 26 May 2007, at 18:45, demerphq wrote:
>> > Maybe ill just upload my files in zip format from now on only, then
>> > its not my problem anymore right? Wou
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:47:18 +0200, demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 5/26/07, Andreas J. Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:06:18 +0200, demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> > On 5/26/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> On 26 M
* Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-26 19:50]:
> One of the very few reasons I maintain a Windows box here and
> endure the pain (for me - subjective I know) that goes with it
> is so I can test my modules against Win32.
So do I. And yeah, I find it painful too. But it’s not open for
deb
* Gabor Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-26 20:10]:
> besides uploading to CPAN and waiting for the CPAN testers to
> test my modules on platforms I don't have? [*]
>
> Is there some publicly available Solaris/HP-UX/etc
> (see full list on this page http://www.cpan.org/ports/index.html )
> set o
On 5/26/07, demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/26/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26 May 2007, at 19:08, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> > Is there some publicly available Solaris/HP-UX/etc
> > (see full list on this page http://www.cpan.org/ports/index.html )
> > set of servers whe
On 5/26/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 26 May 2007, at 19:21, demerphq wrote:
> On 5/26/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 26 May 2007, at 19:08, Gabor Szabo wrote:
>> > Is there some publicly available Solaris/HP-UX/etc
>> > (see full list on this page http://w
On 26 May 2007, at 19:21, demerphq wrote:
On 5/26/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 26 May 2007, at 19:08, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> Is there some publicly available Solaris/HP-UX/etc
> (see full list on this page http://www.cpan.org/ports/index.html )
> set of servers where one could
On 5/26/07, Andreas J. Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:06:18 +0200, demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 5/26/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 26 May 2007, at 18:45, demerphq wrote:
>> > Maybe ill just upload my files in zip format from no
# from demerphq
# on Saturday 26 May 2007 10:45 am:
>> Sorry, but it is *the _compression_ software's* bug.
>
>Fine, then what do i do about it? File a bug with Archive::Tar
>(maintained by a non windows programmer)?
This should be properly handled by the dist action of any sufficiently
modern M
On 5/26/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 26 May 2007, at 19:08, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> Is there some publicly available Solaris/HP-UX/etc
> (see full list on this page http://www.cpan.org/ports/index.html )
> set of servers where one could test his modules?
There's the HP Testdrive
On 26 May 2007, at 19:08, Gabor Szabo wrote:
Is there some publicly available Solaris/HP-UX/etc
(see full list on this page http://www.cpan.org/ports/index.html )
set of servers where one could test his modules?
There's the HP Testdrive thing - and there may be similar things for
other platfo
On 26 May 2007, at 19:06, demerphq wrote:
I was out of line in how i put things. I apologise.
Thanks Yves. I /still/ think it's pretty cool that basically we're
all friends :)
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
If you have already started to argue about Windows vs Unix issues
is there a way - besides uploading to CPAN and waiting for the CPAN testers
to test my modules on platforms I don't have? [*]
Is there some publicly available Solaris/HP-UX/etc
(see full list on this page http://www.cpan.org/ports/
On 26 May 2007, at 19:03, Gabor Szabo wrote:
did you all wake up on the wrong side ?
Could you please calm down?
I can confirm that I'm spectacularly calm :)
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
On 5/26/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 26 May 2007, at 18:45, demerphq wrote:
> Maybe ill just upload my files in zip format from now on only, then
> its not my problem anymore right? Would that be better?
That would be fine.
Fine then. The fact that ExtUtils make dist automa
On 5/26/07, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 26 May 2007, at 18:45, demerphq wrote:
> Maybe ill just upload my files in zip format from now on only, then
> its not my problem anymore right? Would that be better?
That would be fine.
You know - you've kind of tickled a raw nerve here.
On 26 May 2007, at 18:45, demerphq wrote:
Maybe ill just upload my files in zip format from now on only, then
its not my problem anymore right? Would that be better?
That would be fine.
You know - you've kind of tickled a raw nerve here.
One of the very few reasons I maintain a Windows box he
On 5/26/07, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-26 19:20]:
> BTW, id say that if this is an issue for Unix users then they
> should file a bug with the people that wrote their
> decompression software and/or installer software.
It's the decompression s
* demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-26 19:20]:
> BTW, id say that if this is an issue for Unix users then they
> should file a bug with the people that wrote their
> decompression software and/or installer software.
It’s the decompression software’s fault that it correctly
preserves the data i
On 26 May 2007, at 18:16, demerphq wrote:
I dont see it as being my problem as a Win32 developer at all. Im
sympathetic to the annoyance it causes but to me its like opening a
book written in a language you dont read and complaining that it isnt
written in one you do. I mean if Win32 doesnt even
On 5/26/07, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-26 17:35]:
> Can you explain this please? Why would the lack of a set x bit
> on a directory prevent you from doing
>
> perl Makefile.PL
> make
> make test
Yes.
Im assuming this means "Yes it prevent
* demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-26 17:35]:
> Can you explain this please? Why would the lack of a set x bit
> on a directory prevent you from doing
>
> perl Makefile.PL
> make
> make test
Yes.
> Is this simply so you dont have to type 'perl'?
No.
The x bit on a directory determines
On 5/26/07, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Some modules' tarballs don't set the x bit on directories, which makes
it impossible for a non-root user to run Makefile.PL or the module's
tests. The usual cause is that the author suffers from Windows, and the
fix is to use '--mode 755' whe
* David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-26 16:45]:
> I think it would be a good idea for CPANTS to check that
> directories have the x bits set.
++
> This would either be a new metric
+=0
> or could be rolled into 'extracts_nicely'
++
> or could be combined with 'no_symlinks' and called
Some modules' tarballs don't set the x bit on directories, which makes
it impossible for a non-root user to run Makefile.PL or the module's
tests. The usual cause is that the author suffers from Windows, and the
fix is to use '--mode 755' when creating the tarball.
I think it would be a good
25 matches
Mail list logo
