Open p5pRT opened 14 years ago
This is a bug report for perl from rleigh@debian.org\, generated with the help of perlbug 1.39 running under perl 5.10.1.
----------------------------------------------------------------- POSIX.pm does not include the fuction strsignal(3)\, used to return a string describing a signal. It would be great if this functionality could be added.
Thanks\, Roger
On Sun\, Feb 7\, 2010 at 8:41 AM\, rleigh@debian.org \<perlbug-followup@perl.org
wrote:
# New Ticket Created by rleigh@debian.org # Please include the string: [perl #72602] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # \<URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=72602 >
This is a bug report for perl from rleigh@debian.org\, generated with the help of perlbug 1.39 running under perl 5.10.1.
----------------------------------------------------------------- POSIX.pm does not include the fuction strsignal(3)\, used to return a string describing a signal. It would be great if this functionality could be added.
In the meantime\, perlipc shows how you can get the signal names (TERM\, PIPE\, etc). Search for "you can retrieve them from the Config module"
The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'
On Sun Feb 07 05:41:10 2010\, rleigh@debian.org wrote:
POSIX.pm does not include the fuction strsignal(3)\, used to return a string describing a signal. It would be great if this functionality could be added.
Thanks\, Roger
I think the real debate is «should POSIX.pm support more of the POSIX standard or not». Currently seems pretty much frozen at what was supported on Larry's Solaris machine back in 1994. That said\, a module with more than a 1000 functions wouldn't be very desirable.
All the more reasons to modularize POSIX in 5.17 IMHO.
Leon
On Sun Dec 11 16:07:55 2011\, LeonT wrote:
On Sun Feb 07 05:41:10 2010\, rleigh@debian.org wrote:
POSIX.pm does not include the fuction strsignal(3)\, used to return a string describing a signal. It would be great if this functionality could be added.
Thanks\, Roger
I think the real debate is �should POSIX.pm support more of the POSIX standard or not�. Currently seems pretty much frozen at what was supported on Larry's Solaris machine back in 1994. That said\, a module with more than a 1000 functions wouldn't be very desirable.
All the more reasons to modularize POSIX in 5.17 IMHO.
Leon
Leon\,
Would you be able to draw a sketch of what that modularization might look like?
Thank you very much. Jim Keenan
* James E Keenan via RT (perlbug-followup@perl.org) [130205 03:01]:
On Sun Dec 11 16:07:55 2011\, LeonT wrote:
On Sun Feb 07 05:41:10 2010\, rleigh@debian.org wrote:
POSIX.pm does not include the fuction strsignal(3)\, used to return a string describing a signal. It would be great if this functionality could be added.
Thanks\, Roger
I think the real debate is �should POSIX.pm support more of the POSIX standard or not�. Currently seems pretty much frozen at what was supported on Larry's Solaris machine back in 1994. That said\, a module with more than a 1000 functions wouldn't be very desirable.
All the more reasons to modularize POSIX in 5.17 IMHO.
Would you be able to draw a sketch of what that modularization might look like?
I have tried to get modularization in core\, but after much debate it moved onto CPAN as "POSIX::1003" That module needs porting some help\, currently tested for Linux\, HPUX and Darwin.
I will add strsignal() to the next release. -- Regards\,
MarkOv
Mark Overmeer MSc MARKOV Solutions Mark@Overmeer.net solutions@overmeer.net http://Mark.Overmeer.net http://solutions.overmeer.net
Migrated from rt.perl.org#72602 (status was 'open')
Searchable as RT72602$