develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from October 2003

Re: Hidden dependencies?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Nicholas Clark
October 1, 2003 11:44
Re: Hidden dependencies?
Message ID:
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 11:57:26AM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 01:57, Slaven Rezic wrote:
> > I'm still not convinced that it's the responsibility of the perl
> > authors to help the rpm build tool. Maybe one could provide a META.yml
> > file for perl (including
> This is a head-in-the-sand approach (as noted before). Perl will be (is)
> considered broken on systems that use RPM (and that list grows with some
> regularity) because it does not play nicely with external dependency
> systems.

Unusually for me I have an impolite and undiplomatic opinion on this subject,
which you are perfectly free to regard as "head in the sand":

  I don't care

If someone wants to provide a RPM spec file *and a way to keep it up to
date from the MANIFEST* fine - patches welcome.

(but it would only get into maint via blead)

> As with every large project at this point, I think Perl should have a
> spec file as part of the distribution. Building dependency lists

I don't use any RPM based systems. I know many people do. More people
use Windows than Linux. Maybe we should package perl as a PPM.

We are upstream. Spec files are what OS maintainers exist for.
And in general they do a better job than we ever could, because they
work daily dealing with their OS's packaging system.

It is not a heuristic dependency checking of p5p's making that is causing
all this grief.

Nicholas Clark

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About