Re: Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?

[prev] [thread] [next] [Date index for 2005/05/11]

From: Masayoshi Sekimura
Subject: Re: Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?
Date: 02:11 on 11 May 2005
hi,

I'm also seeing this problem on Debian sarge perl_5.8.4.
i think this problem is the cause of "looks_like_number
bug on perl_5.8.4" as follows:

 http://use.perl.org/comments.pl?sid=25179&cid=38508

looks_like_number() is used in dbdimp.c (DBD::SQLite 1.08)

the only solution is to get 5.8.5 or later.

--Masayoshi Sekimura

Dave Howorth wrote:
> Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> 
>> I'm working with a client that has Perl 5.8.3 installed, and
>> when I try to "make test" on Class::DBI 0.96, I get:
>>
>>     t/16-reserved.........ok 2/5Argument "Bad Taste" isn't numeric in
>> subroutine entry at
>> /ssa/homedirs/02/48/merlyn/.cpan/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.3/DBIx/ContextualFetch.pm
>> line 51.
>>     #     Failed test (t/16-reserved.t at line 27)
>>     #          got: undef
>>     #     expected: '10'
>>     t/16-reserved.........ok 5/5# Looks like you failed 1 tests of
>> 5.               
>> t/16-reserved.........dubious                                               
>>             Test returned status 1 (wstat 256, 0x100)
>>     DIED. FAILED test 3
>>             Failed 1/5 tests, 80.00% okay
>>
>> Is this a known problem?  Is the only solution to get past 5.8.3?
>> Or are my problems somewhere else?
>>
>> This is on solaris, using Sun's CC.  (Oooh, that could be a bad deal.)
> 
> 
> FWIW, I'm also seeing this problem on Linux, so I don't think Solaris is
> the problem:
> 
> cpepc210-1:~ # uname -a
> Linux cpepc210-1 2.6.4-52-smp #1 SMP Wed Apr 7 02:11:20 UTC 2004 i686
> i686 i386 GNU/Linux
> cpepc210-1:~ # perl -v
> 
> This is perl, v5.8.3 built for i586-linux-thread-multi
> 
> cpepc210-1:~/.cpan/build/Class-DBI-0.96 # make test
> ...snip...
> t/16-reserved.........ok 2/5Argument "Bad Taste" isn't numeric in
> subroutine entry at
> /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.3/DBIx/ContextualFetch.pm line 51.
> #     Failed test (t/16-reserved.t at line 27)
> #          got: undef
> #     expected: '10'
> t/16-reserved.........ok 5/5# Looks like you failed 1 tests of 5.
> t/16-reserved.........dubious
>     Test returned status 1 (wstat 256, 0x100)
> Scalar found where operator expected at (eval 153) line 1, near "'int'
> $__val"
>     (Missing operator before   $__val?)
> DIED. FAILED test 3
>     Failed 1/5 tests, 80.00% okay
> 
> Cheers, Dave
> 



Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?
merlyn (Randal L. Schwartz) 17:28 on 06 Apr 2005

RE: Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?
Thomas, Mark - BLS CTR 18:11 on 06 Apr 2005

Re: Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?
merlyn (Randal L. Schwartz) 18:21 on 06 Apr 2005

Re: Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?
Perrin Harkins 18:28 on 06 Apr 2005

RE: Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?
Thomas, Mark - BLS CTR 18:30 on 06 Apr 2005

Re: Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?
Dave Howorth 09:37 on 11 Apr 2005

Re: Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?
Dave Howorth 16:25 on 11 Apr 2005

Re: Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?
Dave Howorth 07:18 on 12 Apr 2005

Re: Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?
Masayoshi Sekimura 02:11 on 11 May 2005

Re: Class::DBI 0.96 and perl 5.8.3 - bad combo?
Dave Howorth 09:59 on 11 May 2005

Generated at 06:54 on 17 May 2005 by mariachi v0.52