Re: What is this manifypods() code doing?

2002-11-18 Thread PPrymmer
Michael Scwhern wrote in reply to me: !> http://search.cpan.org/src/PVHP/Pod2VMSHlp-1.02/ ! !Perhaps you should change the name/wrap it in Pod::VMS::Hlp and pod2vmshlp !rather than Pod::Hlp to avoid confusion. Perhaps, but the module Pod::Hlp does take Pod as input and produces VMS HLP as output

Re: [PATCH MM 6.05] ppd and hints portability nits

2002-11-18 Thread PPrymmer
Michael G Schwern wrote in reply to Craig Berry: !> b.) The attribute values printed to the ppd file are surrounded with !> double quotes per XML requirements, but there is no portable way to !> escape double quotes inside of double-quoted strings that works on all !> shells. I've replaced the oc

Re: [PATCH MM 6.05] ppd and hints portability nits

2002-11-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 09:44:05AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > !I figured out a portable way to escape double quotes inside double-quoted > !strings. There's now a perl_oneliner() method which generates a safe > !one-liner for the current OS. The Unix one works. The VMS and Win32 ones > !s

Re: What is this manifypods() code doing?

2002-11-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 09:39:28AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > True. But note that you did not know of the existence of the > module when this thread started since it was that hard to find. > I just wanted to make it easier for VMS perl folks to find it, > but simultaneously not change the n

VOL:[foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
Just out of curiousity and desperate hope, this: VOLUME:[foo.bar][baz.biff]file.wif wouldn't happen to be equivalent to this: VOLUME:[foo.bar.baz.biff]file.wif ? -- Michael G. Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ Perl Quality Assurance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: [foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread Carl Friedberg
Michael, I'll jump in briefly and mutter: concealed devices In brief, no, they would not be equivalent (s /\]\[/\./) That is, the adjoining brackets do not just disappear, $ dir [friedberg.tools][com.fms] %DIRECT-E-OPENIN, error opening [FRIEDBERG.TOOLS][COM.FMS] as input -RMS-F-SYN, file speci

RE: [foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread Henderson, Jordan (Contractor) (DAASC)
No, but VOLUME:[foo.bar.][baz.biff]file.wif ^ (note the dot here) is equivalent to VOLUME:[foo.bar.baz.biff]file.wif Note that you only get one extension this way: VOLUME:[foo.][bar.][baz.biff]file.wif Does not work. Jordan Henderson Defense Automa

RE: [foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread Carl Friedberg
Sorry to the list, Outlook ms$'d my lines: Michael, I'll jump in briefly and mutter: concealed devices In brief, no, they would not be equivalent (s /\]\[/\./) That is, the adjoining brackets do not just disappear, $ dir [friedberg.tools][com.fms] %DIRECT-E-OPENIN, error opening [FRIEDBERG.TOO

RE: [foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread Bohan, Larry
Title: RE: [foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it? the following should work (dot added immed after the bar)  VOLUME:[foo.bar.][baz.biff]file.wif $ DIR USRDISK:[USR.LDB.][SRC.RAMDRIVE] USRDISK:[USR.LDB.][SRC.RAMDRIVE]INITVD.MAR;1    ... ... $ DIR USRDISK:[USR.LDB]

RE: [foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread Carl Friedberg
Jordan's right, my user02 is already a rooted logical (concealed device) which is why my second example failed; it would have worked if user02 were a real device name. $ dir $5$dka102:[use2root.friedberg.tools.][com.fms] Directory $5$DKA102:[USE2ROOT.FRIEDBERG.TOOLS.][COM.FMS] FSC_GENERAL.DEVX;

Re: VOL:[foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread PPrymmer
Michael Schwern wrote: !Just out of curiousity and desperate hope, this: ! !VOLUME:[foo.bar][baz.biff]file.wif ! !wouldn't happen to be equivalent to this: ! !VOLUME:[foo.bar.baz.biff]file.wif ! !? If simple string concatenation were possible it would not have been necessary for File::Spec to ha

RE: [foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread Henderson, Jordan (Contractor) (DAASC)
Actually, Peter's answer is the best yet. Seeing as VOLUME can be a real physical device or a rooted logical, the rules are not generalizable as I stated. Jordan Henderson Defense Automatic Addressing System Center WPAFB, OH DSN: 986 3804 Commercial: (937) 656 3804 Facts are meaningless. You cou

Re: [foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 04:06:43PM -0500, Henderson, Jordan (Contractor) (DAASC) wrote: > No, but > > VOLUME:[foo.bar.][baz.biff]file.wif > ^ (note the dot here) > is equivalent to > > VOLUME:[foo.bar.baz.biff]file.wif > > Note that you only get one extension thi

Re: VOL:[foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 04:14:30PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Had there been a translation concealed terminal logical name > that last one would not have worked either. Here is > an illustration: > > $ define/trans=(conc,term) perl_root DKA200:[perl-5_6_1_root.] Which almost every install

Re: VOL:[foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 4:38 PM -0500 11/18/02, Michael G Schwern wrote: On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 04:14:30PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Had there been a translation concealed terminal logical name that last one would not have worked either. Here is an illustration: $ define/trans=(conc,term) perl_root DKA20

Re: VOL:[foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread PPrymmer
Michael Schwern wrote: !> Had there been a translation concealed terminal logical name !> that last one would not have worked either. Here is !> an illustration: !> !> $ define/trans=(conc,term) perl_root DKA200:[perl-5_6_1_root.] ! !Which almost every installation of Perl on VMS does. *sigh*

Re: VOL:[foo.bar][baz.biff]file.tmp doesn't happen to work, does it?

2002-11-18 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 04:57:03PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Perhaps that could be made to work if you had some way to > ensure that the user specified PREFIX was suited for use > as a rooted logical (that is not easy) then: > > ..FIRST > @ define/trans=conc PREFIX DEV:[FOO.BAR.] >

MM snapshot status on VMS (was Re: [PATCH MM 6.05] ppd and hints portability nits)

2002-11-18 Thread Craig A. Berry
I haven't had a chance to dig into the test failures yet, but here's where things are with a just-downloaded snapshot. Hopefully more later. Michael G Schwern wrote: Look at MM_VMS->perl_oneliner() in the makemaker.org snapshot, let me know if it'll work. If not, patch. It doesn't use any spec