From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: t9700-perl-git.sh is broken on some configurations Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 06:45:42 -0500 Message-ID: <20160304114542.GB569@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20160304085649.GA29752@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git , Johannes Schindelin , Junio C Hamano To: Christian Couder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Mar 04 12:45:54 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aboB7-0002gi-9f for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Mar 2016 12:45:53 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751415AbcCDLpt (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2016 06:45:49 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:54669 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751065AbcCDLps (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2016 06:45:48 -0500 Received: (qmail 30433 invoked by uid 102); 4 Mar 2016 11:45:44 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Fri, 04 Mar 2016 06:45:44 -0500 Received: (qmail 14510 invoked by uid 107); 4 Mar 2016 11:45:57 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Fri, 04 Mar 2016 06:45:57 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 04 Mar 2016 06:45:42 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 11:30:36AM +0100, Christian Couder wrote: > > Those are just guesses, but if we are tickling a bug in perl's parser, > > this might avoid them. I also wondered when "/r" appeared. It was in > > 5.14, so you're presumably good there. > > If I just remove the "r" at the end of "s/\\/\//gr", I get with both > Perl versions: > > Can't modify non-lvalue subroutine call at t/t9700/test.pl line 36. Right, because the string being operated on is the return value of a function, so we can't do substitution on it (unless with "r", whose purpose is to allow exactly such a thing). > > The "use" statement at the top of > > the script says "5.008", so perhaps we should be writing it out longhand > > anyway (that version is "only" 5 years old, so I suspect there are still > > systems around with 5.12 or older). > > Yeah, it would work. Thanks for confirming the longhand does work; I think the patch I just posted elsewhere in the thread should be good for you, then. -Peff