From owner-freebsd-current Wed May 8 1: 5: 4 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.FreeBSD.org.uk [194.242.139.170]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A22437B404; Wed, 8 May 2002 01:04:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (uucp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g4884nAi053811; Wed, 8 May 2002 09:04:49 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grimreaper.grondar.org) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (8.12.2/8.12.2/Submit) with UUCP id g4884nXd053810; Wed, 8 May 2002 09:04:49 +0100 (BST) Received: from grimreaper.grondar.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grimreaper.grondar.org (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g4882FjV006670; Wed, 8 May 2002 09:02:15 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grimreaper.grondar.org) Message-Id: <200205080802.g4882FjV006670@grimreaper.grondar.org> To: Robert Watson Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The future of perl on FreeBSD References: In-Reply-To: ; from Robert Watson "Tue, 07 May 2002 20:33:04 EDT." Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 09:02:15 +0100 From: Mark Murray Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > First question is -- people are going to be upgrading FreeBSD. Having a > stale /usr/bin/perl is going to muck stuff up royally. Likewise, many > existing scripts use /usr/bin/perl at that location. Can we simply have a > symlink that points /usr/bin/perl at /usr/local/bin/perl (and any related > pseudo-programs such as suidperl, etc) as part of the normal install along > with the perl package. DES(?) has a piece of code (to be called /usr/bin/perl) that will find the "real" perl and DTRT. > Likewise, it would be good to clear out the lib > stuff if we can to prevent the inevitable breakage there during the > upgrade. If we hook symlink creation into the build, that would also > force us buildworld/installworld'ers to install the package, which would > improve exposure. Do Perl applications typically hard code paths, or just > rely on Perl to "know where to look"? Perl knows where to look for its libraries. We have the precedent of telnet cleaning out libtelnet; I'm sure we can put a temporary perl- killer in some makefile (Part of "make installworld"? Part of mergemaster?) to clean up. > Second -- are you volunteering to clean up the applications that are > as-yet unclaimed? DES has started on sockstat, and there's been an > on-going effort to fix the build to not need perl (now completed). Or at > least, can you coordinate the effort via a task list, etc? If we go that route, no problem. > Third -- is this something you envision hitting RELENG_4, or just 5.0? NO WAY! CURRENT only. M -- o Mark Murray \_ O.\_ Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message