Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2012
On 10/10/2012 12:30 PM, David Golden wrote: > It's not really very messy at all. It would be in %Config, which is > how we check for threads support today. That's actually a fair point. It should probably go into %Config. I'm assuming that falls naturally out of Configure/metaconfig changes? > Yes, some CPAN code will break and eventually people who care will fix > their tests for the possibility of a taint-removed Perl. I partially agree. I'd still prefer to have the "I really know what I am doing and I want -t/-T to silently become noops" back-door. > We had similar issues as 64 bit architectures became common. ok($num1 > == $num2) tests were failing due to decimal point precision. That's actually simply a bug in the test. This change wouldn't be. > Let's not worry *too* much about CPAN. If a taint-disabled perl were > available, CPAN Testers would start smoking with it, and we'd have > very good visibility into what breaks and doesn't that authors can use > to fix their stuff (if they care) and users can use to decide if they > want to run taint-disabled or not. > > Configuration-determined behaviors should have a *much* lower bar for > compatibility because acceptance of breakage is entirely the > end-users' choice. Agreed. --SteffenThread Previous | Thread Next