Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2011
On Aug 28, 2011, at 10:26 AM, Jesse Vincent wrote, but not in this order: > I know a couple of our "Don't backport this" items have already been backported. The disposition of those items should likely be discussed on p5p. >> These two go together, as the first one only partially fixed the bug: >> >> d34a666 [perl #91880] $_ refcounting problems in @INC filters >> 339c6c6 Follow-up to d34a6664 >> This is one of the items that has been backported already. > Zefram doesn't feel like this sounds serious enough for a backport Does that count as -1 or -0? > > Hugo is concerned by the lack of connection between the patch and the writuep. In particular, it is unclear what the temp fiddling is trying to do, and whether it's doing it right. To put it simply: the TEMP flag is an optimisation. Turning it off (which is what the patch is doing) never causes problems. Leaving it on in this case can cause problems, as bugs in that optimisation can occur in places they would not otherwise occur (in normal code, not just crazy code). >> 71edc89 [perl #92258] <$fh> hangs on a glob copy This one has not been backported, but I would still like to lobby for it. > > Zefram feels that this issues is too contrived to justify any backport It actually happened, so it’s not really contrived. > > Also, the new behavior doesn't match the pre-broken behavior > > # 5.12 (osx) > (blead=10781 pod/) extracto ~/git/perl$ perl -e "open FILE, '<', \*STDIN or die; print <FILE>;" > ^C > # 5.10 (osx) > 130 (blead=10781 pod/) extracto ~/git/perl$ perl5.10 -e "open FILE, '<', \*STDIN or die; print <FILE>;" > *main::STD > > # blead > (blead=10781 pod/) extracto ~/git/perl$ ./perl -e "open FILE, '<', \*STDIN or die; print <FILE>;" > Died at -e line 1. That sounds like a -1 from you. As I pointed out in another message, it’s 5.10 that introduced the broken behaviour. There are three votes on this in cherrymaint, so are you willing to retract your -1? >Thread Previous | Thread Next