develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from June 2018

Re: Any thoughts to a NetWare upgrade?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
NormW
Date:
June 24, 2018 03:40
Subject:
Re: Any thoughts to a NetWare upgrade?
Message ID:
5B2F14A4.6030100@gknw.net
On 23/06/2018 1:42 AM, Craig A. Berry wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 11:48 PM, NormW <normw@gknw.net> wrote:
>> GD,
>> Attached is a 'Readme' file I wrote back when Perl 5.8.9 was still new, and
>> had, with help from a patched 5.8.4 from Novell engineers, been able to
>> build Perl 5.8.9 using LibC, and run MOST of the tests successfully on a
>> NetWare v6 box. (There's a test summary in the attached file).
>>     Thus encouraged, I put the build up on a friend's website as another
>> open-source NetWare project.
>>    I still have the original 5.8.4 port to LibC, and periodically update the
>> diffs such that I can build 5.28.0 for Novell's LibC. After some head
>> banging can again build the documents in html format.
>>
>>    The .\NetWare directory in the Perl source tree was code also supplied by
>> Novell engineers, but the CLib C library it was intended for was superceded,
>> then the staff that did the port (in India) were made redundant, and finally
>> Novell suffered a similar fate.
>>
>>    NetWare was intended solely as a network-server, so the few failures are
>> not so bad, having regard to its first Perl test attempt (that I know of)
>> with LibC.
>>
>>    Wether there is any desire (or need) to upgrade the Perl NetWare source is
>> the crux of the question. If upgrading, I also have a GNU Makefile that can
>> get Perl/Libperl built. I use OWC as the compiler but my Makefile also
>> supports a Public Domain GCC port that was tweaked to handle the NetWare way
>> of doing things.
>
> It seems to me that if what's in the NetWare directory now cannot work
> with current Perl and/or latest Netware but can be replaced by
> something that does, then it should be replaced with what you've got.
> That should include removing anything vestigial that is no longer
> applicable as well as adding/changing whatever needs to be.  Anything
> removed would still be present in older maintenance branches if anyone
> ever wanted to go looking for it.
>
> Can you submit patches?  It would be highly preferable to see a series
> of smallish patches, one for each coherent set of changes, and this
> would especially apply to any changes outside the NetWare directory.
>
GM,
And thanks Craig for your reply.
It would be a wrong to interpret my intent as saying the NetWare Clib 
doesn't work. The Novell people brought out LibC because it was more 
standards compliant for the time. The first releases of Perl on NetWare 
were Clib-based and I would guess they worked without issue.
The major question I think is 'Is anyone working on the Clib version'?
If people are working on the CLib version (patches,etc) and can build 
it, there is, I think, little point in cluttering up your source code. 
To see what I mean, will add here the diff from 5.8.4 which was taken 
against the original 5.8.4 release and a zip of patches that I use on 
current releases. Because LibC does things differently to Clib, the zip 
defines NETWARE, NETWARE_LIBC & NETWARE_CLIB which is likely not kind to 
your source (The NETWARE define in my patches is common to both). The 
red bits in the 5.8.4 diff is what Novell removed from your source to 
change it to LibC, and used the NETWARE define for its new library. The 
0 bytes diffs exist as I use a .bat file to apply, and there's fewer 
complaints from the bat file.

Norm


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