Mailing List Archive: ModPerl: Dev

Re: svn commit: r807116 - in /perl/modperl/trunk: Changes lib/Apache2/Build.pm lib/ModPerl/BuildMM.pm lib/ModPerl/MM.pm

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

gozer at ectoplasm

Aug 24, 2009, 10:35 AM

Post #1 of 4 (2189 views)
Permalink

Re: svn commit: r807116 - in /perl/modperl/trunk: Changes lib/Apache2/Build.pm lib/ModPerl/BuildMM.pm lib/ModPerl/MM.pm

On 24/08/09 04:29 , torsten [at] apache wrote:
> Author: torsten
> Date: Mon Aug 24 08:29:43 2009
> New Revision: 807116
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=807116&view=rev
> Log:
> Fix a typo in ModPerl::BuildMM. Fix a compile time issue by introducing
> lexically scoped loop variables in ModPerl::MM::WriteMakefile().

Great, thanks for the fixes!

> Modified:
> perl/modperl/trunk/Changes
> perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm
> perl/modperl/trunk/lib/ModPerl/BuildMM.pm
> perl/modperl/trunk/lib/ModPerl/MM.pm
>
> Modified: perl/modperl/trunk/Changes
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/perl/modperl/trunk/Changes?rev=807116&r1=807115&r2=807116&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- perl/modperl/trunk/Changes (original)
> +++ perl/modperl/trunk/Changes Mon Aug 24 08:29:43 2009
> @@ -12,6 +12,9 @@
>
> =item 2.0.5-dev
>
> +Fix a typo in ModPerl::BuildMM and introduce lexically scoped loop
> +variables in ModPerl::MM::WriteMakefile(). [Torsten Foertsch]

I'd reword that to be a bit more descriptive to the folks likely to be reading
this to determine if they should update. Something like:

"MODPERL_INC= now correctly supported as an argument to Makefile.PL"

The lexically scoped loop variables should have no impact at all to a potential
upgrader, so it doesn't really need to be mentionned.

> Fix an XSS issue in Apache2::Status reported by Richard J. Brain
> <richard [at] procheckup>. [Torsten Foertsch]
>
>
> Modified: perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm?rev=807116&r1=807115&r2=807116&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm (original)
> +++ perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm Mon Aug 24 08:29:43 2009
> @@ -2068,6 +2068,7 @@
> }
>
> sub inc {
> + local $_;
> my @includes = map { "-I$_" } @{ shift->includes };
> "@includes";
> }

With the rest of the changes in this patch, is this particular change still
necessary?

--
Philippe M. Chiasson GPG: F9BFE0C2480E7680 1AE53631CB32A107 88C3A5A5
http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/ m/gozer\@(apache|cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.24 KB)

torsten.foertsch at gmx

Aug 24, 2009, 11:31 AM

Post #2 of 4 (2035 views)
Permalink

Re: svn commit: r807116 - in /perl/modperl/trunk: Changes lib/Apache2/Build.pm lib/ModPerl/BuildMM.pm lib/ModPerl/MM.pm [In reply to]

On Mon 24 Aug 2009, Philippe M. Chiasson wrote:
> > Modified: perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm
> > URL:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.p
> >m?rev=807116&r1=807115&r2=807116&view=diff
> > ===================================================================
> >=========== --- perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm (original)
> > +++ perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm Mon Aug 24 08:29:43
> > 2009 @@ -2068,6 +2068,7 @@
> > }
> >
> > sub inc {
> > + local $_;
> > my @includes = map { "-I$_" } @{ shift->includes };
> > "@includes";
> > }
>
> With the rest of the changes in this patch, is this particular change
> still necessary?

Not really, but it's a safety measure. The "for ()" idiom is used in
many places. And I know these pieces of code that had bitten me now are
years old. Don't know why it happened now. So, I'd like to have it
there.

Torsten

--
Need professional mod_perl support?
Just hire me: torsten.foertsch [at] gmx

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe [at] perl
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help [at] perl

fred at redhotpenguin

Aug 24, 2009, 12:54 PM

Post #3 of 4 (2032 views)
Permalink

Re: svn commit: r807116 - in /perl/modperl/trunk: Changes lib/Apache2/Build.pm lib/ModPerl/BuildMM.pm lib/ModPerl/MM.pm [In reply to]

On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Torsten
Foertsch<torsten.foertsch [at] gmx> wrote:
> On Mon 24 Aug 2009, Philippe M. Chiasson wrote:
>> > Modified: perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm
>> > URL:
>> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.p
>> >m?rev=807116&r1=807115&r2=807116&view=diff
>> > ===================================================================
>> >=========== --- perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm (original)
>> > +++ perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm Mon Aug 24 08:29:43
>> > 2009 @@ -2068,6 +2068,7 @@
>> > }
>> >
>> > sub inc {
>> > + local $_;
>> > my @includes = map { "-I$_" } @{ shift->includes };
>> > "@includes";
>> > }
>>
>> With the rest of the changes in this patch, is this particular change
>> still necessary?
>
> Not really, but it's a safety measure. The "for ()" idiom is used in
> many places. And I know these pieces of code that had bitten me now are
> years old. Don't know why it happened now. So, I'd like to have it
> there.

What about replacing the for () instances with 'for my'? 'local $_'
may affect other parts of the code that haven't been looked at -
that's my concern with that approach.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe [at] perl
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help [at] perl

gozer at apache

Aug 24, 2009, 1:40 PM

Post #4 of 4 (2037 views)
Permalink

Re: svn commit: r807116 - in /perl/modperl/trunk: Changes lib/Apache2/Build.pm lib/ModPerl/BuildMM.pm lib/ModPerl/MM.pm [In reply to]

On 24/08/09 15:54 , Fred Moyer wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Torsten
> Foertsch<torsten.foertsch [at] gmx> wrote:
>> On Mon 24 Aug 2009, Philippe M. Chiasson wrote:
>>>> Modified: perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm
>>>> URL:
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.p
>>>> m?rev=807116&r1=807115&r2=807116&view=diff
>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> =========== --- perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm (original)
>>>> +++ perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm Mon Aug 24 08:29:43
>>>> 2009 @@ -2068,6 +2068,7 @@
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> sub inc {
>>>> + local $_;
>>>> my @includes = map { "-I$_" } @{ shift->includes };
>>>> "@includes";
>>>> }
>>>
>>> With the rest of the changes in this patch, is this particular change
>>> still necessary?
>>
>> Not really, but it's a safety measure. The "for ()" idiom is used in
>> many places. And I know these pieces of code that had bitten me now are
>> years old. Don't know why it happened now. So, I'd like to have it
>> there.
>
> What about replacing the for () instances with 'for my'? 'local $_'
> may affect other parts of the code that haven't been looked at -
> that's my concern with that approach.

Well said, same concern here.

--
Philippe M. Chiasson GPG: F9BFE0C2480E7680 1AE53631CB32A107 88C3A5A5
http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/ m/gozer\@(apache|cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.24 KB)

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads