From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id: <10110061447.AA03273@clio.rice.edu>
Subject: Re: XP Tests & Perl binary
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2001 09:47:50 -0500 (CDT)
In-Reply-To: <000001c14e53$bac661e0$b87c76d5@pandora.be> from "Tim Van Holder" at Oct 06, 2001 12:43:26 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> OK - if there are any tests that need running under retail XP,
> please let me know where to find test sources; I'll probably
> get Andrew's zips tomorrow and run whatever tests are required.
> 
> I'm also building a new Perl 5.6.1 binary this weekend (with
> the closing of stdaux/stdprn disabled).  Should I link against
> stock 2.03, CVS HEAD or 2.03+W2K-patches?

Andrew is having a few problems with the current CVS tree getting
a stable build.  We're not sure where the problem is - the most
likely candidate is the NTVDM nesting simplification.  I've put
a temporary "cvs" update on ftp://clio.rice.edu/djgpp/dpmiexcp.c
which sets psp instead of getting it.  This can be converted into
a V2.03 version by changing changing _os_trueversion to 
_get_dos_version(1) (which is in ftp://clio.rice.edu/djgpp/p203u.zip).

(Testing note:  I had forgotten I have patched my ntvdm on one of my
Win2K boxes.  I tested on that box and on XP, saw no problems.  I
did not test on an unpatched Win2K box, which may be the problem. )

Don't build against a stock 2.03.  Build against either 2.03+patches
or CVS when you do it.  Since perl nests, I think it's important we
get the dpmiexcp nesting stuff fixed/tested to see if that's the 
problem before wide release.  None of the 2.03 patches breaks any
other system - they just make things better (if not perfect...) on
Win2K and XP.  The dangerous part here is if you used the current
stock patches (cvs or 2.03) your new perl would probably nest fine on
XP and everyplace except Windows 2000 ...