Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl Monk, Perl Meditation
 
PerlMonks  

(Warning) If you use AS then wait for 633

by demerphq (Chancellor)
on Jun 19, 2002 at 10:03 UTC ( #175608=perlnews: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

Hi all,

Yesterday in the CB a number of the monks were raving about the new AS release, build 632. However in correspondance with Gurusamy Sarathy, 5.6 pumpking and lead Perl developer at ActiveState he mentioned to me that there is a rather serious bug in the version of PPM3 (it wont update correctly) and that they will be releasing a new version (build 633) in the next few days (well, he said 'shortly' im assuming this wont be long... :-)

So for all you ActiveState monks out there if you were thinking of upgrading you are probably better off waiting for the new release.

Just wanted to give everybody a heads up.

Yves / DeMerphq
---
Writing a good benchmark isnt as easy as it might look.

Comment on (Warning) If you use AS then wait for 633
Re: (OT/Warning) If you use AS then wait for 633
by NodeReaper (Curate) on Jun 19, 2002 at 11:32 UTC

    Reason: (dvergin) Delete at author's request

    For more information on this node visit: this

      Read the reason for consideration -- it's to remove the OT bit from the title, as it's not off topic. *grin*

      perl -pe '"I lo*`+$^X$\"$]!$/"=~m%(.*)%s;$_=$1;y^`+*^e v^#$&V"+@( NO CARRIER'

      There is apparently a misconception that considering nodes is a tool for filtering our monastery's content. This is, for the most part, not true. There is very little reason to consider a node for deletion besides it being obviously intentional flamebait (read: someone is trolling). Mostly, consideration should be used to bring to the attention of the editors a node that is causing a problem with the layout or has an uninformative title. You can refuse to approve offtopic posts and you can downvote them. There's no need to consider for deletion unless they're really miles off topic (like, discussing the latest single from the charts or something).

      I post this because I'm concerned that anyone would think of deletion automatically when they see that a node is being considered. That should not be what one associates with consideration.

      Makeshifts last the longest.

Re: (Warning) If you use AS then wait for 633
by crazyinsomniac (Prior) on Jun 20, 2002 at 06:15 UTC
    I don't believe you.

    Let me say that again, I don't believe you.

    Furthermore, let me add on that, I don't believe you.

    Honestly demerphq, I don't believe you. It won't update correctly is not very descriptive. I've got 632 and have been using it fine for days now. I haven't tried updating ppm3, so i'm not sure if i've tested for whatever serious bug which reportedly exists.

    I beg of you, please clarify.

    UPDATE (Wed Jun 26 09:25:21 2002) :

    It's been a while and I installed about 20 packages since, and i've come to the conclusion that PPM3, the version you speak of, sucks donkey balls. I still haven't seen the bug you describe, but searching has become a pain in the ass. Whereas before, searching for File::Cache, yielded results, this time round, you should either search for File or Cache or File-Cache. Whoever messes around with ppm really screwed up big time. I say stick to ppm (ie ppm2x) until this business gets sourted out, cause as it stands, it's not worth the trouble.

     
    ______crazyinsomniac_____________________________
    Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most.
    perl -e "$q=$_;map({chr unpack qq;H*;,$_}split(q;;,q*H*));print;$q/$q;"

      Hi crazy,

      Good to see you are in your usually challenging mood ;-)

      All I can do is quote the email I recived from Gurusamy Sarathy

      >Oh, and the boys on PM are raving about AS 632. (I didnt notice ther +e was a >new release.) Apparently they are quite impressed with some of the ch +anges. >Looks like another job well done. :-) Thanks. FYI, 632 unfortunately had a rather serious bug in PPM3 ("upgrade" didn't work) so there will be a 633 build shortly with that fix.
      To be honest since I installed AS 632 i havent used either PPM or PPM3. So I really couldnt say if Gurusamy is correct. OTOH, I see no reason to disbelieve the man, after all he is primarily responsible for the creation of a stable, integrated Win32 Perl, not to mention being one of the senior developers at ActiveState.

      Yves / DeMerphq
      ---
      Writing a good benchmark isnt as easy as it might look.

        From ppm3 help:
        upgrade - shows availables upgrades for installed packages
        I can't say that this not working seems like a big issue, for me anyway (glancing at the module upload lists every now and then to check if I really need to upgrade an important module.) - perhaps for a professional sysadmin this is important though?

        Cheerio!
        Osfameron
        http://osfameron.perlmonk.org/chickenman/

AS 633 is ready...
by demerphq (Chancellor) on Jun 24, 2002 at 09:21 UTC
    Just a quick note, the fixed release is now ready.

    Yves / DeMerphq
    ---
    Writing a good benchmark isnt as easy as it might look.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: perlnews [id://175608]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others having an uproarious good time at the Monastery: (8)
As of 2014-12-26 11:32 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (171 votes), past polls