[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Ebcdic rule
|
From: |
Paul Eggert |
|
Subject: |
Re: Ebcdic rule |
|
Date: |
Tue, 2 Oct 2001 15:49:31 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: Russ Allbery <address@hidden>
> Date: 02 Oct 2001 15:27:06 -0700
>
> There's at least an active community of people who ported Perl to EBCDIC
> and continue to maintain it, apparently because they're using it
> regularly.
Yes, but Autoconf-based tools that run on EBCDIC mainframes (e.g. GNU
make) don't seem to need special Autoconf support. EBCDICness is
easily checked at compile-time already, so I don't offhand see why
this is an Autoconf issue.
I asked him whether he actually used mainframes mainly because his
message sounded like it was prompted by theoretical issues, not by a
problem that he'd actually run into in practice.
- Ebcdic rule, Pfeiffer Daniel, 2001/10/02
- Re: Ebcdic rule, Paul Eggert, 2001/10/02
- Re: Ebcdic rule, Russ Allbery, 2001/10/02
- Re: Ebcdic rule,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: Ebcdic rule, Eric Siegerman, 2001/10/03
- Re: Ebcdic rule, Harlan Stenn, 2001/10/03
- Re: Ebcdic rule, Paul Eggert, 2001/10/04
- Re: Ebcdic rule, Mike Castle, 2001/10/04
- Re: Autoconf, DOS and NT (was Ebcdic rule), Paul Eggert, 2001/10/04
- Re: Autoconf, DOS and NT (was Ebcdic rule), Mike Castle, 2001/10/04
- Re: Autoconf, DOS and NT (was Ebcdic rule), Paul Eggert, 2001/10/04
- Re: Autoconf, DOS and NT (was Ebcdic rule), Earnie Boyd, 2001/10/04
- Re: Autoconf, DOS and NT (was Ebcdic rule), Paul Eggert, 2001/10/04