delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann) |
Message-Id: | <10109241704.AA15111@clio.rice.edu> |
Subject: | Re: DJGPP & Windows 2000 weelky status report for 23-Sep-2001 |
To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Date: | Mon, 24 Sep 2001 12:04:33 -0500 (CDT) |
Cc: | h DOT m DOT brand AT hccnet DOT nl (H.Merijn Brand), eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii) |
In-Reply-To: | <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010924193139.1793C-100000@is> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Sep 24, 2001 07:33:29 PM |
X-Mailer: | ELM [version 2.5 PL2] |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
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 |
> > I ask because perls config expects the last element to start with 'pc' for > > djgpp environments. > > I'm guessing that your uname.exe was built with the CVS library. The > function `uname' in the CVS is much more smart about the CPU type, so it > reports i686 instead of the mere pc that was reported with djdev203. > > The Perl config scripts should be updated to know about this change. Should we return pc686 from CVS library? I don't see why i686 is any more informative than pc686, especially if it breaks current code.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |