Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:16:39 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net> To: Anton Berezin <tobez@tobez.org> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/www Makefile ports/www/p5-CGI.pm Makefile distinfo pkg-comment pkg-descr pkg-plist Message-ID: <10787.995019399@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:02:40 %2B0200." <20010713120240.C46563@heechee.tobez.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:02:40 +0200, Anton Berezin wrote:
> Your only reason in favor of p5-CGI seems to be the fact that there are
> no other p5 ports named .pm.
How is the casual observer supposed to interpret the presence of '.pm'
appended to the port directory name of a p5- port, as distinct from
other p5- port drectory names that have no such suffix?
You're just introducing an inconsistency we can do without.
> How do we solve this?
As already explained:
p5-CGI -> p5-CGI-modules
p5-CGI.pm -> p5-CGI
Now's probably not the time to repeat my suggestion to simply update the
modules in the base system, is it? I suppose not. Instead, let me ask
how Perl5 knows to try the CGI.pm in ${PREFIX} instead of the one
supplied by the base system. :-)
Ciao,
Sheldon.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?10787.995019399>