|
Posted by Ben Morrow on April 22, 2008, 3:48 pm
Please log in for more thread options
> >> >
> >> > 5.10 is not binary-compatible with 5.8, so you will need to rebuild
> >> > mod_perl against 5.10. AIUI, mod_perl needs to be rebuilt against a new
> >> > version of perl anyway, as it does a lot of poking around in
> >> > undocumented parts of perls guts.
> >>
> >> That appears to no longer be the case - mod_perl 2.0.4 was released
> >> just a couple days ago, and one of the listed changes is that "it
> >> works with 5.10."
> >
> > Read what I said again.
>
> What you said makes no sense when taken at face value.
>
> Ordinary XS modules are not binary-compatible, and need to be rebuilt - but
> that's *always* the case, and it's not the result of using any undocumented
> calls. Mod_perl does use undocumented calls, but it needed to be ported as
> a result of that, not simply rebuilt.
OK, perhaps I should be clearer.
Perl versions 5.8.1 through 5.8.8 were considered 'binary-compatible' by
p5p. Most XS modules built against 5.8.1 will work correctly with 5.8.8
without rebuilding. This is not true of mod_perl: since it uses
undocumented calls, it requires rebuilding for *any* change in perl
version, even one advertised by p5p as 'binary-compatible'.
Perl version 5.10 is considered by p5p to break binary compatibility.
All XS modules, mod_perl included, will need to be rebuilt. Perl
versions 5.10.x will, almost certainly, be binary-compatible with
5.10.0, so again modules *other* than mod_perl won't need to be rebuilt.
In my original reply I confused the '5.10 is binary-incompatible with
5.8' and the 'mod_perl is never binary-compatible under any change in
perl version' parts of the above.
> I chose the most charitable interpretation that made sense - that you're
> aware of the situation and simply mistyped "rebuild" when you were actually
> referring to the porting effort.
Thank you for your charity :), but I wasn't and didn't. The
clarification is appreciated.
Ben
| 
XML Sitemap