Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things
 
PerlMonks  

comment on

( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??
The problem here is very similar to what you report for 'make test'

Yes - that's the issue.
On MS Windows, be it Windows 7 & mingw-built perl-5.34.0 (as in my case), or Windows 10 & MSVC-built (as in the testers matrix), the overriding of $^O generates that error.

The line numbers are different: 71 (here) vs. 76 (yours) — I don't know if that's significant.

In earlier attempts to work out what was going on, I had inserted some debug statements into Entity.pm.
I then commented out those statements - thereby leaving the code in its original state, but altering the line numbers.
So it's not significant, and I'm sorry for the confusion.
I believe it's only Windows that's being affected by this.

The distribution provides both a Makefile.PL and a Build.PL. The INSTALL file only references perl Build.PL followed by various ./Build commands (no make anywhere). I had a look at a few reports, all had ./Build test — again, I don't know if that's significant.

I don't think there's anything significant in that.
It makes no difference whether the module is built using Module::Build or ExtUtils::MakeMaker. The behaviour is still the same.
If cpan/cpanm/cpanp is invoked to do the building, then I think M::B will be used.
When I build manually from source, I use EU::MM as that's my preference.

Because Strawberry Perl have not yet released a perl later than 5.32.1, there aren't many Windows perls in the wild that are at version 5.34 or later.
I build my own perls and test them regularly, but I haven't been testing their capabilities to build Path::Class because that module has never interested me.
Having recently become aware of this problem, I'm unsure as to where it should be reported.
Maybe I should just open a perl Issue and ask there - but I wanted to first draw on any wisdom that exists here.

Cheers,
Rob

In reply to Re^2: Is it ever legitimate to override $^O ? by syphilis
in thread Is it ever legitimate to override $^O ? by syphilis

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":



  • Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
    <code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
  • Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
  • Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.
Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others examining the Monastery: (6)
As of 2024-04-19 15:20 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found