[31047] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 2292 Volume: 11
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Mon Mar 23 21:09:43 2009
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 18:09:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Mon, 23 Mar 2009 Volume: 11 Number: 2292
Today's topics:
Re: Extract Parren matched values <tadmc@seesig.invalid>
Re: Extract Parren matched values sln@netherlands.com
Re: Extract Parren matched values <Ansher.M@gmail.com>
Re: Extract Parren matched values <Ansher.M@gmail.com>
Re: How to use a variable as regular expression? <slsamliu@gmail.com>
Re: How to use a variable as regular expression? <slsamliu@gmail.com>
Re: Perl killed after child spawn <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at>
regex question: extended [^...] concept? <wl@gnu.org>
Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept? <smallpond@juno.com>
Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept? <willem@snail.stack.nl>
Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept? <wl@gnu.org>
Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept? <jurgenex@hotmail.com>
Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept? <smallpond@juno.com>
Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept? <ben@morrow.me.uk>
Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept? <wl@gnu.org>
Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept? <wl@gnu.org>
translating memcache php code to perl <jcharth@gmail.com>
Re: Why Perl 5.10.0 is still considered stable? <smallpond@juno.com>
Re: Why Perl 5.10.0 is still considered stable? <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:08:17 -0500
From: Tad J McClellan <tadmc@seesig.invalid>
Subject: Re: Extract Parren matched values
Message-Id: <slrngsfk0h.cbc.tadmc@tadmc30.sbcglobal.net>
ansher <Ansher.M@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a file which looks something like this...
[snip]
> I want a list of values which qualifies the condition m/\&[a-z]+/.
>
> It will be great if you can help me in how to get the exact pattern
> match values to an array.
----------------
#!/usr/bin/perl
use warnings;
use strict;
my @ampersands;
while ( <DATA> ) {
push @ampersands, /(&[a-z]+)/g;
}
print "$_\n" for @ampersands;
__DATA__
l axn1;c=c(&dat)'&lnk';nz
*include &tt.qin;tt=WEB
*include &base.qin;
*include q6.qin;
*include q7.qin; axn=q7;col(b)=&kod;pun=&p;fil=&fb
*include q8.qin; axn=q8;col(b)=&qod;pun=&p;fil=&fb
n01&txt ;c=gkeeper.eq.1
n01Not &txt ;c=gkeeper.eq.2
----------------
--
Tad McClellan
email: perl -le "print scalar reverse qq/moc.noitatibaher\100cmdat/"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 18:32:14 GMT
From: sln@netherlands.com
Subject: Re: Extract Parren matched values
Message-Id: <7clfs45010ad9htnpocr88oh833gds4c43@4ax.com>
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:37:47 -0700 (PDT), ansher <Ansher.M@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hello
>
>I have a file which looks something like this...
>
>l axn1;c=c(&dat)'&lnk';nz
>*include &tt.qin;tt=WEB
>*include &base.qin;
>*include q6.qin;
>*include q7.qin; axn=q7;col(b)=&kod;pun=&p;fil=&fb
>*include q8.qin; axn=q8;col(b)=&qod;pun=&p;fil=&fb
>n01&txt ;c=gkeeper.eq.1
>n01Not &txt ;c=gkeeper.eq.2
>
>I want a list of values which qualifies the condition m/\&[a-z]+/.
>
>It will be great if you can help me in how to get the exact pattern
>match values to an array.
>
>
>&dat
>&lnk
>&tt
>&base
>&kod
>&p
>&fb
>&qod
>&txt
>
-sln
use strict;
use warnings;
my @vals = join('', <DATA>) =~ /\&[a-z]+/g;
print "@vals\n";
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:54:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: ansher <Ansher.M@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Extract Parren matched values
Message-Id: <8f8a2730-d780-4b9a-a215-a788c86e38bb@y34g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 23, 11:08=A0pm, Tad J McClellan <ta...@seesig.invalid> wrote:
> ansher <Anshe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have a file which looks something like this...
>
> [snip]
>
> > I want a list of values which qualifies the condition m/\&[a-z]+/.
>
> > It will be great if you can help me in how to get the exact pattern
> > match values to an array.
>
> ----------------
> #!/usr/bin/perl
> use warnings;
> use strict;
>
> my @ampersands;
> while ( <DATA> ) {
> =A0 =A0 push @ampersands, /(&[a-z]+)/g;}
>
> print "$_\n" for @ampersands;
>
> __DATA__
> l axn1;c=3Dc(&dat)'&lnk';nz
> *include &tt.qin;tt=3DWEB
> *include &base.qin;
> *include q6.qin;
> *include q7.qin; axn=3Dq7;col(b)=3D&kod;pun=3D&p;fil=3D&fb
> *include q8.qin; axn=3Dq8;col(b)=3D&qod;pun=3D&p;fil=3D&fb
> n01&txt =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0;c=3Dgkeeper.eq.1
> n01Not &txt =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0;c=3Dgkeeper.eq.2
> ----------------
>
> --
> Tad McClellan
> email: perl -le "print scalar reverse qq/moc.noitatibaher\100cmdat/"
Thanks a lot :)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:55:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: ansher <Ansher.M@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Extract Parren matched values
Message-Id: <87035df0-8007-4f76-9ed3-64350c2b5f14@p6g2000pre.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 23, 11:32=A0pm, s...@netherlands.com wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:37:47 -0700 (PDT), ansher <Anshe...@gmail.com> wro=
te:
> >Hello
>
> >I have a file which looks something like this...
>
> >l axn1;c=3Dc(&dat)'&lnk';nz
> >*include &tt.qin;tt=3DWEB
> >*include &base.qin;
> >*include q6.qin;
> >*include q7.qin; axn=3Dq7;col(b)=3D&kod;pun=3D&p;fil=3D&fb
> >*include q8.qin; axn=3Dq8;col(b)=3D&qod;pun=3D&p;fil=3D&fb
> >n01&txt =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0;c=3Dgkeeper.eq.1
> >n01Not &txt =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0;c=3Dgkeeper.eq.2
>
> >I want a list of values which qualifies the condition m/\&[a-z]+/.
>
> >It will be great if you can help me in how to get the exact pattern
> >match values to an array.
>
> >&dat
> >&lnk
> >&tt
> >&base
> >&kod
> >&p
> >&fb
> >&qod
> >&txt
>
> -sln
>
> use strict;
> use warnings;
>
> my @vals =3D join('', <DATA>) =3D~ /\&[a-z]+/g;
> print "@vals\n";- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks a lot :)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:13:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: SamL <slsamliu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: How to use a variable as regular expression?
Message-Id: <07c1d57c-8208-47b0-9b00-c187bcf4bc26@q9g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 23, 12:01=A0pm, gba...@hiwaay.net (Greg Bacon) wrote:
> SamL wrote
>
> : I want to use a variable as a regular expression because I want user
> : to be able to specify the regular expression in command line.
> :
> : Basically I want something like this:
> :
> : perl -e '$pattern=3D's/a/b/'; $x=3D'a'; $x=3D~$pattern; print $x;'
> :
> : where user can modify $pattern at runtime.
> :
> : Of course the above does not work. I am wondering if there is some
> : mechanism in perl allowing me to do that. For example, something like
> : eval in ksh.
>
> Yes, and it's called eval even!
>
> perl -le '$pattern=3D"s/a/b/"; $x=3D"a"; eval "\$x=3D~$pattern"; print $x=
'
>
> Hope this helps,
> Greg
> --
> Criminal means, once tolerated, are soon preferred.
> =A0 =A0 -- Edmund Burke
Thanks a lot. It works.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: SamL <slsamliu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: How to use a variable as regular expression?
Message-Id: <d5560150-2cbe-4283-b2d6-bc4362fd9e85@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 23, 12:31=A0pm, J=FCrgen Exner <jurge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> SamL <slsam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I want to use a variable as a regular expression because I want user
> >to be able to specify the regular expression in command line.
>
> >Basically I want something like this:
>
> >perl -e '$pattern=3D's/a/b/'; $x=3D'a'; $x=3D~$pattern; print $x;'
>
> >where user can modify $pattern at runtime.
>
> You seem to be thourougly confused.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 s/a/b/
> is neither a regular expression nor a pattern. In your context it is a
> string but ordinarily as code it would be a command, the substitute
> command to be precise.
> The only regular expression aka pattern is the 'a' in that line. And
> yes, there is no problem whatsoever using variables in regular
> expressions, just do it.
>
> That's what you asked for, but that is not your problem. Your problem is
> that you have data (the content of $pattern) and want that data
> evaluated as code. That is a completely different issue, applies to any
> data and any command, and has nothing whatsoever to do with regular
> expressions.
>
> >Of course the above does not work. I am wondering if there is some
> >mechanism in perl allowing me to do that. For example, something like
> >eval in ksh.
>
> Excellent guess. What happened when you checked
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 perldoc -f eval
>
> jue
Thanks for your clarification. Yes eval is what I need.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:59:06 +0100
From: "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at>
Subject: Re: Perl killed after child spawn
Message-Id: <slrngsg1hb.s6e.hjp-usenet2@hrunkner.hjp.at>
On 2009-03-23 15:30, earthwormgaz <earthwormgaz@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 23 Mar, 14:39, Krishna Chaitanya <schai...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well, I don't know about the msg function but you can add the
>> backticks code inside an eval block, and then check on $@? Just
>> thinking aloud. Also it won't hurt to have an END block print out
>> anything you want.
>
> I looked at an eval block, and wrapped my backtick call in one ...
>
> eval {
> $result = `$testLocalBin` or die "oh bugger\n";
> }; warn $@ if $@;
>
> It looks like the above now. My Perl script still runs thusly ...
>
> bash-3.00$ ./runTests.pl
> Entering directory /tests/unittests
> Killed
You cannot catch a KILL signal. You will have to find out where the
signal comes from. I would be very surprised if a SIGABRT to one process
would directly cause a SIGKILL on another process. Most likely there is
something in the test framework which causes this (catching SIGABRT and
then sending SIGKILL to all processes in the process group?). DTrace and
truss are probably good tools to find out what is happening.
hp
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:00:29 +0000 (UTC)
From: Werner Lemberg <wl@gnu.org>
Subject: regex question: extended [^...] concept?
Message-Id: <gq8pot$up6$1@news.albasani.net>
Keywords: regex
Folks,
consider this input:
foo ... foo ... bar
where `...' doesn't contain the word `foo'. How can I write a regular
expression which matches `foo ... bar' but not `foo ... foo ... bar'? Were
it a single character as in
f ... f ... bar
I could write
/f[^f]*bar/
but how can I do something similar for a word? In other words, I search an
extension of the [^.] concept which covers a sequence of characters.
I've looked into both the `perlre' and `perlretut' manual pages (of perl
5.10.0), but it contains relevant to this problem.
Werner
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: smallpond <smallpond@juno.com>
Subject: Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept?
Message-Id: <f45eaccb-af46-4853-9575-299366a23d11@e15g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 23, 4:00 pm, Werner Lemberg <w...@gnu.org> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> consider this input:
>
> foo ... foo ... bar
>
> where `...' doesn't contain the word `foo'. How can I write a regular
> expression which matches `foo ... bar' but not `foo ... foo ... bar'? Were
> it a single character as in
>
> f ... f ... bar
>
> I could write
>
> /f[^f]*bar/
>
> but how can I do something similar for a word? In other words, I search an
> extension of the [^.] concept which covers a sequence of characters.
>
> I've looked into both the `perlre' and `perlretut' manual pages (of perl
> 5.10.0), but it contains relevant to this problem.
>
> Werner
print "OK" if ($source =~ /foo.*bar/ and $source !~ /foo.*foo.*bar/);
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:45:19 +0000 (UTC)
From: Willem <willem@snail.stack.nl>
Subject: Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept?
Message-Id: <slrngsft6v.jbo.willem@snail.stack.nl>
Werner Lemberg wrote:
)
) Folks,
)
)
) consider this input:
)
) foo ... foo ... bar
)
) where `...' doesn't contain the word `foo'. How can I write a regular
) expression which matches `foo ... bar' but not `foo ... foo ... bar'? Were
) it a single character as in
)
) f ... f ... bar
)
) I could write
)
) /f[^f]*bar/
)
) but how can I do something similar for a word? In other words, I search an
) extension of the [^.] concept which covers a sequence of characters.
That's quite difficult and complicated to do in a single regexp.
You basically have to cover all cases.
This might work, but I'm not sure I got all cases right:
/foo[^f]*((f[^o]|fo[^o])[^f]*)*f?bar/
You can see that using two regexes one after the other (as mentioned
crossthread) is a lot easier.
SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:26:04 +0000 (UTC)
From: Werner Lemberg <wl@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept?
Message-Id: <gq8upc$730$1@news.albasani.net>
Willem <willem@snail.stack.nl> wrote:
> ) consider this input:
> )
> ) foo ... foo ... bar
> )
> ) where `...' doesn't contain the word `foo'. How can I write a regular
> ) expression which matches `foo ... bar' but not `foo ... foo ... bar'?
>
> That's quite difficult and complicated to do in a single regexp.
> You basically have to cover all cases.
> This might work, but I'm not sure I got all cases right:
> /foo[^f]*((f[^o]|fo[^o])[^f]*)*f?bar/
> You can see that using two regexes one after the other (as mentioned
> crossthread) is a lot easier.
Thanks for the answers. I'm really surprised that there are so many regex
extensions in Perl but not a single one which covers this. Is this
difficult to handle in a regex machine, or is there no need normally for
it?
Especially in combination with the (?PARNO) stuff (as described in the
perlre man page) this could be quite handy for recursively parsing nested
expressions.
I also wonder why there is no callback mechanism with in regular
expressions. The (?{ code }) construct allows execution of arbitrary Perl
code but within the regex it always evaluates to true. I would like to have
a similar construct, say, (!{ code }), which evaluates to true or false
depending on `code'. Then I could implement my above request by myself,
simply checking the passed subgroup whether it contains the given string.
Werner
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:49:44 -0700
From: Jürgen Exner <jurgenex@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept?
Message-Id: <ls0gs4to3dus22tfob9db50f37f7j79lk5@4ax.com>
Werner Lemberg <wl@gnu.org> wrote:
>consider this input:
>
> foo ... foo ... bar
>
>where `...' doesn't contain the word `foo'. How can I write a regular
>expression which matches `foo ... bar' but not `foo ... foo ... bar'?
reverse() the text and match non-greedy /^rab...oof/, then reverse() the
found match again.
jue
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 15:20:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: smallpond <smallpond@juno.com>
Subject: Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept?
Message-Id: <b8f84a99-b628-4cb0-8649-58fd457b5d5a@f19g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 23, 4:45 pm, Willem <wil...@snail.stack.nl> wrote:
> Werner Lemberg wrote:
>
> )
> ) Folks,
> )
> )
> ) consider this input:
> )
> ) foo ... foo ... bar
> )
> ) where `...' doesn't contain the word `foo'. How can I write a regular
> ) expression which matches `foo ... bar' but not `foo ... foo ... bar'? Were
> ) it a single character as in
> )
> ) f ... f ... bar
> )
> ) I could write
> )
> ) /f[^f]*bar/
> )
> ) but how can I do something similar for a word? In other words, I search an
> ) extension of the [^.] concept which covers a sequence of characters.
>
> That's quite difficult and complicated to do in a single regexp.
> You basically have to cover all cases.
>
> This might work, but I'm not sure I got all cases right:
>
> /foo[^f]*((f[^o]|fo[^o])[^f]*)*f?bar/
>
> You can see that using two regexes one after the other (as mentioned
> crossthread) is a lot easier.
>
> SaSW, Willem
> --
> Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
> made in the above text. For all I know I might be
> drugged or something..
> No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
> #EOT
$s="fooafoosdbar";
print "OK" if ($s =~ /foo[^f]*((f[^o]|fo[^o])[^f]*)*f?bar/);
OK
It won't work unless you prevent backtracking, I think. The initial
foo in your pattern can match the second one in the string.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:24:19 +0000
From: Ben Morrow <ben@morrow.me.uk>
Subject: Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept?
Message-Id: <jpel96-hqh.ln1@osiris.mauzo.dyndns.org>
Keywords: regex
Quoth Werner Lemberg <wl@gnu.org>:
>
> consider this input:
>
> foo ... foo ... bar
>
> where `...' doesn't contain the word `foo'. How can I write a regular
> expression which matches `foo ... bar' but not `foo ... foo ... bar'? Were
> it a single character as in
>
> f ... f ... bar
>
> I could write
>
> /f[^f]*bar/
>
> but how can I do something similar for a word? In other words, I search an
> extension of the [^.] concept which covers a sequence of characters.
/foo (?: (?!foo) . )* bar/x
If a suffix of "foo" matches a prefix of "bar" you may end up with false
negatives, depending on what you wanted. That is,
"foo...fobar" =~ /foo (?: (?!fob) . )* bar/x
is false, even though the "fob" you don't want to match is part of the
"bar" you do. It is possible to correct this with yet another negative
lookahead:
/foo (?: (?! fob (?!ar) ) . )* bar/x
but at this point the expression is becoming very hard to understand :).
Ben
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 00:07:20 +0000 (UTC)
From: Werner Lemberg <wl@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept?
Message-Id: <gq987o$i9n$1@news.albasani.net>
> >consider this input:
> >
> > foo ... foo ... bar
> >
> >where `...' doesn't contain the word `foo'. How can I write a regular
> >expression which matches `foo ... bar' but not `foo ... foo ... bar'?
> reverse() the text and match non-greedy /^rab...oof/, then reverse() the
> found match again.
Thank you. While this is a solution for my concrete example, it
unfortunately leads to nothing if you want to generalize the [^.] concept.
Werner
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 00:15:45 +0000 (UTC)
From: Werner Lemberg <wl@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: regex question: extended [^...] concept?
Message-Id: <gq98nh$i9n$2@news.albasani.net>
Ben Morrow <ben@morrow.me.uk> wrote:
> > foo ... foo ... bar
> >
> > where `...' doesn't contain the word `foo'. How can I write a regular
> > expression which matches `foo ... bar' but not `foo ... foo ... bar'?
> /foo (?: (?!foo) . )* bar/x
Aah. I've already thought of a negative lookahead, but I haven't had the
idea of using `(.)*' to provide a `moving anchor' for it. Thanks for the
idea.
> If a suffix of "foo" matches a prefix of "bar" you may end up with false
> negatives, depending on what you wanted. That is,
> "foo...fobar" =~ /foo (?: (?!fob) . )* bar/x
> is false, even though the "fob" you don't want to match is part of the
> "bar" you do. It is possible to correct this with yet another negative
> lookahead:
> /foo (?: (?! fob (?!ar) ) . )* bar/x
Uuh, a negative lookahead *within* another negative lookahead. How is the
exactly defined? Is it equivalent to
(?! fob ) (?! ar )
?
Werner
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:39:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: joe <jcharth@gmail.com>
Subject: translating memcache php code to perl
Message-Id: <af5f3290-133a-40f9-bcab-b363d949f22f@c36g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
Hello I was able to set up cookie authenticaion on my apache2 server
using php. Now I am trying to translate a couple of lines of code from
php to perl but I have not worked with cookies in perl so i am not
sure how to do this. Is there a better way to enable cookie / perl
authenticaion in apache2 or should I just keep hacking this code?
This are the lines of code
http://authmemcookie.sourceforge.net/
$memcache = new Memcache;
$memcache->connect('localhost', 11000) or die ("Could not
connect");
$key=md5(uniqid(rand(), true).$_SERVER["REMOTE_ADDR"].time());
$value="UserName=".$my_user."\r\n";
$value.="Groups=".$my_groups."\r\n";
$value.="RemoteIP=".$my_remoteip."\r\n";
$value.="Expiration=".$my_expiretime."\r\n";
if ($my_send_pass_flag!=FALSE) $value.="Password=".$my_password."\r
\n";
$value.="Email=".$my_mail."\r\n";
$value.="Name=".$my_nom."\r\n";
$value.="GivenName=".$my_prenom."\r\n";
$memcache->set($key,$value,false,$my_expiretime);
if ($my_expiretime!=0) setcookie($my_cookie_name,$key,time()+
$my_expiretime,$my_path,$my_domain,$my_secure);
else setcookie($my_cookie_name,$key,$my_expiretime,$my_path,
$my_domain,$my_secure);
header("Location: ".$my_referer);
exit;
I installed the memcached perl libraries and so far go this but not
sure how to link all the other pieces of code to my perl script
$memcache = new Cache::Memcached {
'servers' => "localhost:11000",
'debug' => 0,
'compress_threshold' => 10_000,
};
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:08:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: smallpond <smallpond@juno.com>
Subject: Re: Why Perl 5.10.0 is still considered stable?
Message-Id: <31be572d-7565-4c01-8d97-9fcf70159f4e@f22g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 8, 4:44 pm, Tim Greer <t...@burlyhost.com> wrote:
> smallpond wrote:
> > On Mar 7, 11:22 pm, Tim Greer <t...@burlyhost.com> wrote:
> >> howa wrote:
> >> >http://www.cpan.org/src/README.html
>
> >> > The latest branch is 1 year, 2 months, 19 days old, and suppose the
> >> > memory leak is still exist in this version?
>
> >> >http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=503975
>
> >> > Why not fix it?
>
> >> The patch was made to 5.10.0.17, which is still 5.10.0, so I assume
> >> that's why it's showing as the latest.
>
> > I don't use Debian, but Fedora's latest build was Feb 16, 2009
> > using their release number 5.10.0-56 and still has the leak.
> > I didn't see it in the Fedora bugzilla database so I added it.
>
> I'm actually on CentOS. I had just meant to say that 0.17 is supposed
> to be when it was patched. I gather it wasn't then. Interesting.
Fedora team has already rolled out the fix for F9 and F10.
That's quick work. I guess Debian isn't as enthusiastic.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489204
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 23:08:38 +0100
From: "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at>
Subject: Re: Why Perl 5.10.0 is still considered stable?
Message-Id: <slrngsg237.s6e.hjp-usenet2@hrunkner.hjp.at>
On 2009-03-23 20:08, smallpond <smallpond@juno.com> wrote:
> On Mar 8, 4:44 pm, Tim Greer <t...@burlyhost.com> wrote:
>> smallpond wrote:
>> > On Mar 7, 11:22 pm, Tim Greer <t...@burlyhost.com> wrote:
>> >> howa wrote:
>> >> >http://www.cpan.org/src/README.html
>>
>> >> > The latest branch is 1 year, 2 months, 19 days old, and suppose the
>> >> > memory leak is still exist in this version?
>>
>> >> >http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=503975
>>
>> >> > Why not fix it?
>>
>> >> The patch was made to 5.10.0.17, which is still 5.10.0, so I assume
>> >> that's why it's showing as the latest.
>>
>> > I don't use Debian, but Fedora's latest build was Feb 16, 2009
>> > using their release number 5.10.0-56 and still has the leak.
>> > I didn't see it in the Fedora bugzilla database so I added it.
>>
>> I'm actually on CentOS. I had just meant to say that 0.17 is supposed
>> to be when it was patched. I gather it wasn't then. Interesting.
>
> Fedora team has already rolled out the fix for F9 and F10.
> That's quick work. I guess Debian isn't as enthusiastic.
Why do you guess that? According to to URL quoted above the bug was
fixed in 5.10.0-17. The version in Lenny is 5.10.0-19. So it is already
fixed.
hp
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 2001 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Users-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
#The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
#comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
#the single line:
#
# subscribe perl-users
#or:
# unsubscribe perl-users
#
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
NOTE: due to the current flood of worm email banging on ruby, the smtp
server on ruby has been shut off until further notice.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
#To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
#where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
#For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
#perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
#sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
#answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V11 Issue 2292
***************************************
