From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 95615 invoked by alias); 18 Jul 2016 12:03:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Sender: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 95584 invoked by uid 89); 18 Jul 2016 12:03:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: limerock02.mail.cornell.edu Received: from limerock02.mail.cornell.edu (HELO limerock02.mail.cornell.edu) (128.84.13.242) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:03:39 +0000 X-CornellRouted: This message has been Routed already. Received: from authusersmtp.mail.cornell.edu (granite3.serverfarm.cornell.edu [10.16.197.8]) by limerock02.mail.cornell.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4_cu) with ESMTP id u6IC3bRO021945 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:03:37 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.5] (mta-68-175-148-36.twcny.rr.com [68.175.148.36] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by authusersmtp.mail.cornell.edu (8.14.4/8.12.10) with ESMTP id u6IC3ZL6012836 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:03:36 -0400 Subject: Re: perl-5.24? To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com References: <919f1d39-a69c-329f-d7bb-a58828a1fa2e@cornell.edu> From: Ken Brown Message-ID: <809dcad6-e168-ce2c-1576-fec00c72d6cd@cornell.edu> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:03:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-PMX-Cornell-Gauge: Gauge=XXXXX X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-07/txt/msg00050.txt.bz2 On 7/18/2016 3:39 AM, Achim Gratz wrote: > Ken Brown writes: >> I'm wondering whether you have plans to update perl to 5.24. The biber >> developer has just announced that the next version of biber will require >> it because "they have the postfix dereference notion officially >> supported and I can get rid of the the horrible circumfix operator syntax". > > The RC1 for 5.24.1 is available now. If it's binary compatible with the > 5.22 modules, I could update Perl without too much trouble, I think. Thanks. The INSTALL file says that it's not binary compatible and that XS modules will have to be recompiled. It looks like we have about 8 of those in the distro. Ken