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

Re: Installation experiences

On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 23, 1999 at 02:15:22PM +0200, Kalle Olavi Niemitalo wrote:
> > The comments in the cross-install script were unclear about which
> > perl packages are needed.  I then decided to download just
> > perl-base, since it was so much smaller.  Apparently this was the
> > wrong choice, as install-info needed ENOENT from POSIX.pm which
> > was not included.  I was able to hack around that, but couldn't
> > POSIX.pm be moved to perl-base?
> I will clarify the comment.
> # perl-base_5.00404, perl
> really means you need both, perl and perl-base.
> POSIX.pm will _not_ be moved to perl-base, because the whole idea of
> perl-base is to have a small minimal perl which fits on the boot disk.
> The right solution is to fix install-info and dpkg-divert (IIRC) not to need
> ENOENT at all. Patches are welcome (not just hacks, we need to make IanJ
> happy).

Why can't we hard-code the value of ENOENT?  We know what it's going to be
- our install disks will only ever run with the version of glibc which is
on them.  

|  Jelibean aka  | jules@jellybean.co.uk         |  6 Evelyn Rd	       |
|  Jules aka     | jules@debian.org              |  Richmond, Surrey   |
|  Julian Bean   | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk        |  TW9 2TF *UK*       |
|  War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left.             |
|  When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy.          |

Reply to: