Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 12:55:32 -0800 From: Tony Jones <tony@tonyjones.com> To: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Perl 5.8.2 problems (was Re: how to build Spamassassin) Message-ID: <20031211205532.A31BD613@zebedee.tonyjones.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 11 Dec 2003 19:25:19 GMT." <20031211192519.GA75256@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The main reason for doing that sort of thing with most unixoid systems > is that using a unique prefix for every software package you install > means that you can easily identify which files belong to what package > when later on it comes time to update things. I understand this, but I still like the seperation. Were I installing a package, I'd understand having to operate within the confines of someone elses location scheme, BUT I'm building from source for gods sake. Being able to change the base prefix of the port install seems like a pretty basic piece of functionality. Obviously there are some exceptions, but it would be easy for the port to inform you if PREFIX could not be changed in the environment. I did a 'make install' on portupgrade, didn't realize I'd have to install ruby to install perl :-) Grief. Then I found my problem. My stock shell was ksh, obtained from research.att.com many moons ago. It was doing some odd stuff with the environment (not via any dotted scripts). perl -v would work in ksh but once I su'd to root (csh) something was messed up. Shrug. chsh to sh or csh seems to work for that shell and also when su'ing to root. With my /usr/local/perl prefix and all. Thanks for everyones help & chastisement :-)) tony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031211205532.A31BD613>