[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: perlconfig in postinst: opinion please...

Michael E. Deisher writes ("perlconfig in postinst: opinion please..."):
> Hi.  I'm packaging auto-pgp for Debian.  It relies on some perl
> headers.  My question is this:  should I rely on the correctness of
> the .ph files generated when perl was installed or should I run
> perlconfig in my postinst script?  I had trouble getting auto-pgp to
> work until I ran perlconfig but this may have simply been due to the
> fact that my system is an early 0.93R5 one.

You could, since you're guaranteed that Perl5 is available, say
 use Socket;
instead of
 require 'sys/socket.ph';

> One more dumb question [we really do need updated packaging
> guidelines]:   Perl is part of the base system, right?  Therefore, I
> do not need a "REQUIRES:  perl" in the control file, right?  Or has
> all this changed since Bruce started paring down the base system???

No, it hasn't.  (It's possible that some packages ought to be split up
into several pieces, one of which is part of the base, but I'm not
convinced that this is true for Perl.)


Reply to: