Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from March 2013
On Mon Mar 25 12:49:34 2013, LeonT wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Petr Pisar <ppisar@redhat.com> wrote:
> > The problem here is the same file gets installed into
> /usr/{,local/}bin and
> > into @INC. What's good for to have the same file twice in your
> system?
>
> AFAIK the original place was in @INC. It was later added to
> install{,vendor,site}bin.
>
> > And is xsubpp supposed to be "require"-d by other perl code? Then
> there is no
> > reason to install the file there.
> >
> >> AFAIK, there is no requirement that the paths named in @INC contain
> >> *only* Perl library (.pm) files.
> >
> > Thus it's reasonable to put the file there?
>
> Hysterical raisins.
>
> MakeMaker depends on it being there. Even if we'd change how MakeMaker
> works, there's still older versions to keep into account. I agree with
> you it's not a logical location, but we just can't go around breaking
> 20 years of MakeMaker out of stylistic reasons.
>
> >>a configuration file (typemap) as well as
> >> a read-only version of xsubpp.
> >>
> > Again, what is it good for?
>
> Actually, I wouldn't know a better place for that than in @INC.
> Granted, nowadays we'd use File::ShareDir or some such, but it boils
> down to the same.
>
> > If I can be constructive, moving lib/ExtUtils/xsubpp to
> scripts/xsubpp and
> > removing 'EXE_FILES' => ['lib/ExtUtils/xsubpp'] from Makefile.PL
> should fix
> > this issue.
>
> Hindsight is 20/20.
>
> Leon
>
If Leon's argument is correct, then we are stuck with the status quo --
which makes this ticket closable?
Any dissent?
Thank you very much.
Jim Keenan
---
via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: open
https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=117289
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next