Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998 02:37:05 -0700 (PDT) From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi Asami) To: mark@grondar.za Cc: committers@freebsd.org, ports@freebsd.org, markm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: p5-* ports Message-ID: <199808310937.CAA08974@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: <199808290704.JAA00820@gratis.grondar.za> (message from Mark Murray on Sat, 29 Aug 1998 09:04:46 %2B0200)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* > * No - I belive we discussed this before? I'm negotiable, but I'd prefer * > * /usr/local/libexec/perl5/. * > * > Yes we discussed it, but you said you're going to keep them in * > /usr/local/lib/perl5 for now, but split them to share/perl5 (manpages) * > and libexec/perl5 (everything else). * * Right - it looks as though splitting out manpages will be a bit * problematic, but the idea of putting p5-* _code_ into local/libexec/perl5/* * is certainly going to eventually happen. I won't do it at first so * as not to break the ports tree. So you won't. Then it's ok. I thought you did, that's why I was surprised. :) * :-) When I am commit ready, I'll start yelling and finalising policy * with you. I will not commit until you are happy. Ok. :) * > * > (2) If so, where does it get the value "/usr/local" from? * > You mean it's built in when you build /usr/bin/perl5 (and friends)? * * Yup. Ok. Just wondering. * At a first look, this looks OK. I wasn't planning to put in the * version on the /usr/bin/perl5 binary, but it seems like a good * thing, so I'll do it. Well, I'm not sure. It's not like we're going to have a whole bunch of them installed at the same time anyway. Unless you have a reason to believe the user is going to need to keep the old binary around (to run old compiled modules? I dunno), you should probably keep it as "perl5" or put a code in the installation target to remove the old one. I'm sure some people will object to having /usr/bin being cluttered with all sorts of perl5.00X0Y stuff. (Remember, in /usr/src, you can't easily do a "pkg_delete perl-5.00404". :) * > One thing that is *very important* is to absorb all hackery into * > bsd.port.mk so individual ports don't have to be adjusted depending on * > whether the user is running -stable or -current. (I'd also prefer to * > have it work on users with pre-src-perl5 -current with a new * > bsd.port.mk, thus the above test.) * * I'll bear that in mind. The last point (in parentheses) is just my preference though. If it's going to make your life too hard, it's ok to drop it. Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199808310937.CAA08974>