On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 12:05:48PM -0800, Andrew Hewus Fresh wrote: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 06:45:12PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 05:13:01PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 02:24:51AM +0100, Marc Espie wrote: > > > > Or we can automate this with something like this: > > > > > <SNIP> > > Our Devel::PPPort is too old. We ship with 3.57, p5-CDB_File and p5-Moose > > ship with ppport.h generated by 3.62. > > We could update Devel::PPPort in base.
This will fix the current problem. But we can always have an old Devel::PPPort in base and a have module in ports that comes with and needs a new ppport.h. Somehow the porter should have a mechanism to handle this. Only 2 of 300 ports that I test have issues, so it is a rare action. Per default espie@'s idea works well. If we manually fix 2 ports that is fine for me. Or we replace ppport.h only if it is outdated. > I do plan to work on getting 5.34 in after I finish my fw_update(8) TODO > list and get the "vendor lib" patch committed. I'm not sure that will > make 7.1 though. Plans for new Perl are good to hear. Thanks for updating it regualry. > > ppport.h -- Perl/Pollution/Portability Version 3.57 > > Automatically created by Devel::PPPort running under perl 5.032001. > > > > ppport.h -- Perl/Pollution/Portability Version 3.62 > > Automatically created by Devel::PPPort running under perl 5.032000. > > > > ppport.h -- Perl/Pollution/Portability Version 3.62 > > Automatically created by Devel::PPPort running under perl 5.033008. > > > > bluhm > >
