Re: [perl #109760] Cwd's pure perl abs_path and its test disagree onwhat's ok

On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 10:21 PM, James E Keenan via RT <
perlbug-followup@perl.org> wrote:

> Thanks for the patch.  Can you elaborate a bit as to how it addresses
> the issues raised in the earlier posts in this RT?
>

Looking into your earlier comments, and testing to see if the patch
addresses my problem.

• Re: [perl #109760] Cwd's pure perl abs_path and its test disagree onwhat's ok by Eric Brine
• [perl #109760] Cwd's pure perl abs_path and its test disagree on what's ok by Brian Gottreu via RT
• Re: [perl #109760] Cwd's pure perl abs_path and its test disagree onwhat's ok by Eric Brine
• [perl #109760] Cwd's pure perl abs_path and its test disagree on what's ok by James E Keenan via RT