At 12:33 PM 6/24/2002 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>But now that you mention it I think what needs editing is
>[.vms]perlvms.pod.
Yup, you're right.
>So - would this be OK? Should we incorporate any part of the SET NOON fix
>that Martin just requested for configure.com (it seems important)?
I think so, yes, though I'm still puzzled about why he hit this snag and no
one else has. I'm about to start a test run that incorporates all these
changes.
>diff -ru perl-5_8_0-RC2_orig/vms/perlvms.pod perl-5_8_0-RC2/vms/perlvms.pod
>--- perl-5_8_0-RC2_orig/vms/perlvms.pod Mon Jun 24 12:28:06 2002
>+++ perl-5_8_0-RC2/vms/perlvms.pod Mon Jun 24 12:28:21 2002
Well, I would simply move if from the "don't have" to the "have" list since we've seen
pretty good evidence that every VMS system in the last 15 years has had it. How about
this:
--- vms/perlvms.pod;-0 Sat Jun 1 12:03:52 2002
+++ vms/perlvms.pod Mon Jun 24 11:37:46 2002
@@ -338,7 +338,7 @@
caller, chdir, chmod, chown, chomp, chop, chr,
close, closedir, cos, crypt*, defined, delete,
die, do, dump*, each, endpwent, eof, eval, exec*,
- exists, exit, exp, fileno, fork*, getc, getlogin,
+ exists, exit, exp, fileno, fork*, getc, getlogin, getppid,
getpwent*, getpwnam*, getpwuid*, glob, gmtime*, goto,
grep, hex, import, index, int, join, keys, kill*,
last, lc, lcfirst, length, local, localtime, log, m//,
@@ -359,7 +359,7 @@
undefined behavior (rarely, we hope):
chroot, dbmclose, dbmopen, flock,
- getpgrp, getppid, getpriority, getgrent, getgrgid,
+ getpgrp, getpriority, getgrent, getgrgid,
getgrnam, setgrent, endgrent, ioctl, link, lstat,
msgctl, msgget, msgsend, msgrcv, readlink, semctl,
semget, semop, setpgrp, setpriority, shmctl, shmget,
[end of patch]
