Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!bfmny0!tneff From: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff) Newsgroups: comp.sources.bugs Subject: Re: perl 3.0 patch #28 Message-ID: <15756@bfmny0.BFM.COM> Date: 16 Aug 90 04:54:33 GMT References: <9132@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV> <15748@bfmny0.BFM.COM> <1990Aug15.230635.2040@NCoast.ORG> Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff) Lines: 24 In article <1990Aug15.230635.2040@NCoast.ORG> allbery@ncoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR/KT) writes: >As quoted from <15748@bfmny0.BFM.COM> by tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff): >+--------------- >| * We don't HAVE an unexec() call, and the reference to it in eval.c is >| not #ifdef'd in any way, nor does Configure check for it. So the make >| proceeds to bomb in 'ld' with an unresolved. Configure should check its >+--------------- > >I think something's wrong on your end. We don't have unexec on the Altos >1000, either, and I built PL28 this morning with no problems and it passed all >tests and is now installed. Oh hell. Mea culpa dudes. I installed an unexec patch from Joe Buehler months ago and forgot about it. The unexec() call isn't original equipment, it was added by the patch. After patching up to PL28, my Makefile no longer had the hack to add unexec.c and so the reference blew up. print "Just another Perl loser," -- "We plan absentee ownership. I'll stick to `o' Tom Neff building ships." -- George Steinbrenner, 1973 o"o tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM