develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from January 2003

Re: Minor error in Porting/Glossary

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Abe Timmerman
Date:
January 27, 2003 15:09
Subject:
Re: Minor error in Porting/Glossary
Message ID:
200301280017.01278.abe@ztreet.demon.nl
Op een regenachtige winterdag (Monday 27 January 2003 09:10), schreef H.Merijn 
Brand:

> On Sun 26 Jan 2003 21:49, Rafael Garcia-Suarez <rgarciasuarez@free.fr> 
wrote:
> > Porting/Glossary has :
> >
> > xs_apiversion (xs_apiversion.U):
[snip]
> >         The versioned site_perl directory was introduced in 5.005,
> >         so that is the lowest possible value.
> >         Since this can depend on compile time options
> >         it is set by Configure.  Other non-default sources
> >         of potential incompatibility, such as multiplicity, threads,
> > 	                                                    ^^^^^^^
> >         debugging, 64bits, sfio, etc., are not checked for currently,
> >                    ^^^^^^ ?
> >         though in principle we could go snooping around in old
> >         Config.pm files.
> >
> > where the underlined points (at least) seem to be innacurate.
> > Merijn ?
>
> Huh, me? I'm not the internals guy. Gimme a patch to this doc, and I'll
> apply it to the metaunit that defines it, after which I'll regenerate
> Glossery.

I think Rafael wants to say that nowadays perl (i.e. Configure) uses some of 
these options to create an ARCH string that is used to distinguish between 
binary incompatible binaries of the same version of perl.

The documentation states that (amongst others) threads and 64bit builds *are* 
incompatible, but undistinguishable from each other. This is currently known 
to be untrue.

So yes, we need a doc patch, but Rafeal asked you to sort of summarise all 
build options that *will* produce a binary incompatible perl, but cannot be 
distinguished from other builds (and incidently clean up the list mentioned 
above). We know that at least "threads", "multi", "64int", "64all", "ld" are 
currently used to show binary incompatibility. 
As I understand from Sarathy, "uselargefiles" on Win32 will also produces a 
binary incompatible perl (as opposed to -Uuselargefiles) but is not mentioned 
in the ARCH string.

Can you sort this mess? If not, who *can*?


Good luck,

Abe
-- 
Anton Tagunov> P.S. People do like gory details :)

I don't like telling them.
                                   -- Jarkko Hietaniemi on p5p @ 2002-03-06


Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About