Subject: Re: [Fwd: Bug: Perl:IsWinNT undefined & RFE, only use "/" in reg values, not names..?]
From: Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 12:01:07 -0800

On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 11:27:29AM -0800, linda w wrote:
> What features does one get with a unix perl over a perl built where 
> "WinNT" is
> defined as true or false?  Many (most? all?) of the Win32 calls are 
> available
> in the Cygwin environment, why not compile the perl as a mixed breed 
> perl that
> defines WinNT?

If possible, please shorten your lines.

> What is lost by allowing Perl to make libwin32 calls.
> 
> If Cygwin is supposed to enable me to run my utils and scripts from bash or
> cnd.exe, then why should perl be different?  What do I lose by defining 
> -MWin32
> in the PERL5OPS?, or put another way, why isn't it on and present all 
> the time?

Because the perl-libwin32 package was released a little over 3 weeks ago.
Allow some time, please.

On the win32-perl/ActiveState side, the stuff in our package is divided
into two places, the perl core, and the libwin32 CPAN distribution.
-MWin32CORE will get you what is in the perl core for non-cygwin perl's.
The need for that should go away at some point.  Code using other Win32::
parts should already have "use Win32".

Note that cygwin runs not just on WinNT and derivitaves; you can expect
Win32::IsWinNT to return false for Win9x, just as it does with ActiveState
(IIRC).

> Besides, it seems, that the cpan modules for perl can't be for active state
> perl since they have their own package manager -- but are for the 
> floundering
> win32-perl that is mostly eclipsed by active state's perl and cygwin's 
> perl.

As far as I know, they are usable with ActiveState (for XS modules
assuming you have the same compilation tools ActiveState uses).
That lanman thing seems to be an abberation, in that it isn't set up
like a real perl module.

> It seems cyg_win_ was designed to add POSIX  and unix compatibility and
> functionality to the _Win_ environment with the intent of making things
> _easier_ (Easy is good -- not everyone can be a master of every technology).
> So why not make things easier for perl scripters as well by starting with
> a perl that is unix (works with cpan, handles paths with "//", "/") and
> win (paths handle "\\", ":" and "\\\\" and define WinNT) compatible?
> 
> Is there some fundamental reason why they can't both be present in perl?

In making POSIX-like paths work in a drive-letter world, you can't
have everything.  What is it exactly that you would like that you see
as missing?

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/