Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 16:16:53 +0100 From: Joe Karthauser <joe@pavilion.net> To: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za> Cc: Clifton Royston <cliftonr@lava.net>, Jaime Bozza <jaime@ecofl.com>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Perl Base Modules Message-ID: <20000428161652.O40708@pavilion.net> In-Reply-To: <12817.952371991@axl.ops.uunet.co.za>; from sheldonh@uunet.co.za on Mon, Mar 06, 2000 at 09:46:31PM %2B0200 References: <20000306091538.B1871@lava.net> <12817.952371991@axl.ops.uunet.co.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 06, 2000 at 09:46:31PM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > > On Mon, 06 Mar 2000 09:15:39 -1000, Clifton Royston wrote: > > > Give it another chance? > > Actually, I'm more concerned with how we precisely denote on the vendor > branch the origin of the updates. How well the CPAN auto-updater thing > works is something of a side-issue at this point. > > Remember, the CPAN updates are going to get blown out of the water by > your next ``make world'' without some Makefile fiddling. basically, if > we're going to do this in the source tree without taking the files off > the vendor branch, we need a meaningful vendor release tag. Why does this happen? Isn't there a INC path for Perl, and shouldn't the locally installed modules come first? Joe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000428161652.O40708>