Unfortunately, my changes to Perl 5 have been working better than my
changes to Parrot. IIRC, the changes made fixed OpenBSD and NetBSD on
Parrot while Cygwin and Solaris didn't seem to fare as well.
Steve
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Thorsten Glaser via RT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On We
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Andrew Whitworth via RT wrote:
> Is this still not resolved? This ticket has not seen any discussion
> since 2006. To double-check, I think we need people to check
> t/op/trans.t on:
>
> *Solaris
> *OpenBSD
> *NetBSD
> *Cygwin
>
> If it passes all these platforms, I think th
Is this still not resolved? This ticket has not seen any discussion
since 2006. To double-check, I think we need people to check
t/op/trans.t on:
*Solaris
*OpenBSD
*NetBSD
*Cygwin
If it passes all these platforms, I think the ticket is resolved. If
not, maybe we need to break this into more-speci
On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 04:02:21AM -0800, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
> Is this issue considered resolved for BSD and/or has acceptable test
> coverage?
>
>
I believe that things were alright for both OpenBSD and NetBSD. Solaris
is still an issue. t/op/trans.t passes when run like
perl t/ha
It seems I'm mistaking problems. OpenBSD does do atan2 correctly.
But, OpenBSD doesn't like printing "-0.0". It'll print it as positive.
I'm not sure how to get it to print -0 instead of +0.
On Mar 21, 2006, at 5:58 PM, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
Steve,
What version of OpenBSD were you runnin
Steve,
What version of OpenBSD were you running (perhaps something old or
direct from CVS)?
-J
--
On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 03:13:18PM -0800, Joshua Isom via RT wrote:
> On OpenBSD 3.8 x86, I still get the failures with -0.0/0.0. Check the
> smokes...
>
> On Mar 21, 2006, at 3:01 PM, Joshua H
On OpenBSD 3.8 x86, I still get the failures with -0.0/0.0. Check the
smokes...
On Mar 21, 2006, at 3:01 PM, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 06:42:42AM -0800, Steve Peters via RT wrote:
[jhoblitt - Sun Jan 01 18:49:23 2006]:
I've commited a possible fix for openbsd, cygwin, &
On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 06:42:42AM -0800, Steve Peters via RT wrote:
> > [jhoblitt - Sun Jan 01 18:49:23 2006]:
> >
> > I've commited a possible fix for openbsd, cygwin, & solaris as
> changesets
> > r10839 & r10843. I basically applied what Steve Peters proposed but
> > with the changes in mat
> [jhoblitt - Sun Jan 01 18:49:23 2006]:
>
> I've commited a possible fix for openbsd, cygwin, & solaris as
changesets
> r10839 & r10843. I basically applied what Steve Peters proposed but
> with the changes in math.c instead of creating init.c (as agreed to on
> #parrot).
>
> This doesn't app
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Steve Peters writes:
: On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 09:01:55AM -0600, Greg Bacon wrote:
:
: > After upping to r10844, trans.t still fails:
:
: What operating system are you using?
Sorry. That report was for Cygwin.
Greg
On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 09:01:55AM -0600, Greg Bacon wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Joshua Hoblitt via RT" writes:
>
> : I've commited a possible fix for openbsd, cygwin, & solaris as changesets
> : r10839 & r10843. I basically applied what Steve Peters proposed but
> : with th
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Joshua Hoblitt via RT" writes:
: I've commited a possible fix for openbsd, cygwin, & solaris as changesets
: r10839 & r10843. I basically applied what Steve Peters proposed but
: with the changes in math.c instead of creating init.c (as agreed to on
: #parro
I've commited a possible fix for openbsd, cygwin, & solaris as changesets
r10839 & r10843. I basically applied what Steve Peters proposed but
with the changes in math.c instead of creating init.c (as agreed to on
#parrot).
This doesn't appear to have done anything for gcc/solaris... can someone
FYI - bugs #36835 & #38060 have been merged into #34549.
-J
--
14 matches
Mail list logo
