Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 11:08:34 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <dev-null@NUXI.com> To: Anton Berezin <tobez@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Trish Lynch <trish@bsdunix.net>, John Hay <jhay@icomtek.csir.co.za>, Szilveszter Adam <sziszi@bsd.hu>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: perl wrapper and PATH Message-ID: <20020608110834.A25686@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20020608150739.GD13047@heechee.tobez.org>; from tobez@FreeBSD.ORG on Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 05:07:39PM %2B0200 References: <200206080935.g589Z2v51306@zibbi.icomtek.csir.co.za> <20020608094010.M403-100000@femme.listmistress.org> <20020608150739.GD13047@heechee.tobez.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 05:07:39PM +0200, Anton Berezin wrote: > It sounds reasonable, but what's the point of having a wrapper at all > then? One way or the other we need to have /usr/bin/perl exist and be usable. Many have perl scripts in ~/bin that they expect to run on all modern OS's -- which means they have /usr/bin/perl. > I am of the opinion that we don't need the wrapper and that use.perl can > easily do some symlink magic to solve all outstanding issues with perl > in -current. With the limitations in the exiting wrapper, either use.perl or using mailwrapper is probably what we should do. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020608110834.A25686>