Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2007
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Nicholas Clark wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 12:24:49AM -0800, Yitzchak Scott- > Thoennes wrote: >> It should be fine, assuming a new CPAN libwin32 and standalone Win32 >> get released before 5.8.9. If it were a non-core module that the "not >> be able to use" applied to, I can see reason to keep it out of maint, >> but the core Win32 *is* 0.27, and there's no reason the core should >> need to work with an older Win32. The installing-libwin32- >> downgrading-Win32 thing is just an artifact of the planned changes >> not being quite complete. >> >> Does this make sense? > > Yes, except excuse my ignorance on one thing: > > If you upgrade to 5.8.9, can existing installed modules stop working? > (I'm not entirely sure which parts of what is being discussed is in > the Win32 module in the core, and which parts are installed from CPAN) The core version of the Win32 module is comprehensive; there are no parts that can be loaded from CPAN that are not yet in the core version. The problem is that libwin32 contains *both* an older version of a core module (Win32) and the latest version of other modules (Win32::*). Since you cannot downgrade the core module, you could not install the other modules. The only way I can see existing modules to stop working is if you have an installation where you have the current (or older) libwin32 installed in a directory that you put into @INC in front of the core directory, effectively disabling the core version of the Win32 module. The analogous situation with Scalar::Utils and overload would be when the user installed Scalar-List-Utils 1.07 into a tree at the front of @INC. overload::strVal would break because the core version of Scalar::Utils would be disabled by this. One thing we could do, at least for maint, is duplicate the old code from win32/win32.c in Win32CORE and remove the version check for Win32. I can make a patch for this later this week, but I don't think it should end up in blead (except maybe for testing), because this would be essentially dead bloat. Cheers, -JanThread Previous | Thread Next