[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [zzdev] Re: Trying to work under NT 4
- To: "'zzdev@xxxxxxxxxx'" <zzdev@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [zzdev] Re: Trying to work under NT 4
- From: "Michael K. Jones" <mkjones@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 19:40:11 -0500
- Reply-to: zzdev@xxxxxxxxxx
That did the trick. Zigzag now comes up (hurrah!). It creates an empty
file (I guess, since I didn't have one around when I started...). When
I cursor around, the screen gets all messed up; cells start appearing
where there were none before. Could be a curses problem; don't have
time to chase it just now. Also, when I exit and come back in, it
complains:
No cursor 0 at zigzag line 650.
...propagated at zigzag line 2248.
If I delete the zigzag.zz it created the first time I ran it, it comes
up OK.
BTW, I grabbed Berkeley DB 2.4.14, and DB_File 1.62. Are these the
appropriate versions, or should I go for something more "classic"?
-- mkj
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Michael K. Jones <mkjones@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Stone Hill Consulting
+1.508.481.9041
-----Original Message-----
From: mjd@xxxxxxxxxx [SMTP:mjd@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, December 07, 1998 12:07 AM
To: Michael K. Jones
Cc: mjd@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [zzdev] Re: Trying to work under NT 4
> I'm currently up a creek without a POSIX paddle.
It's probably not important.
> So I tried commenting out the "use POSIX;" line, and here's
what I get:
>
> Bareword "SEEK_SET" not allowed while "strict subs" in use
at zigzag
> line 627.
That's good, because SEEK_SET was defined in Posix.pm, and now
it's
warning you that it's not defined. There are two answers here:
1. That's in a very little-used feature, so for most things
won't
matter much if it's broken.
2. You can probably make it work if you add this line near the
top of zigzag:
sub SEEK_SET () { 0 }
It's just a constant.
> Bareword "NULL" not allowed while "strict subs" in use at
zigzag
> line 2155.
Ditto here:
sub NULL () { 0 }
> Is the lack of a POSIX module going to be a real bummer?
No.