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

Re: Hidden dependencies?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Aaron Sherman
October 1, 2003 13:26
Re: Hidden dependencies?
Message ID:
On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 14:43, Nicholas Clark wrote:

> > 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.

I guess it's not worth arguing about too much, but it certainly is the
case that many separate parties from FreeBSD to Red Hat who have made
Perl a part of their core OS distribution have had a heck of a time
tracking Perl's dependencies in an automatic way. Perhaps there's
something that could be done to help them demonstrate that Perl hasn't
forgotten that its platform adaptability (via metaconfig) was one of the
original reasons for its rapid and widespread adoption.

Now that metaconfig's approach is mainstream, what can Perl do to
continue to be one of the world's most easily installed and maintained
development tools? I don't claim to have the RIGHT answers, I was just
trying to present ONE to get the conversation moved away from one,
uninteresting tool.

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

If it were, it would not be causing the grief, one presumes... ;-)

Aaron Sherman <>
Senior Systems Engineer and Toolsmith
"It's the sound of a satellite saying, 'get me down!'" -Shriekback

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