Re: Perl Policy interpretation issue (was Re: Bug#174593: libxml-parser-perl contains sharable files in /usr/lib)
Brendan O'Dea (email@example.com) wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 28, 2002 at 11:06:19PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> >On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote:
> >> Adam Heath (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> >> > On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Well, then you better start filing bug reports against perl and the Perl Policy
> >> > > (which I'm following by the letter, by the way).
> >> >
> >> > You aren't.
> >> Yes I am. Look at the rules files in all my perl packages.
> >You're module is both binary and perl. Perl policy doesn't document this.
> >This is a bug in perl policy.
> >It's very short sighted that the perl policy doesn't consider this. The
> >obvious thing is to have the files split into separate dirs.
> Don't be a pedantic twat doogie.
> The perl-code side of binary modules depends on bootstrapping the
> correct version of the compiled code.
> As such, those .pm files, which are generally only a thin interface over
> the XS code should go into /usr/lib as they are closely tied to the
> binary code (and different arches may be at different revision levels).
> MakeMaker generally does the right thing.
> If you believe otherwise, stop whining, provide adequate justification
> and file a bug on debian-policy.
So I can close the bug report filed against libxml-parser-perl (#174593)
which started this thread?
Ardo van Rangelrooij
home email: email@example.com
home page: http://people.debian.org/~ardo
GnuPG fp: 3B 1F 21 72 00 5C 3A 73 7F 72 DF D9 90 78 47 F9