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

Re: perl-base 'conflicts'




On Dec 22, 2004, at 5:00 PM, Brendan O'Dea wrote:
As I asked in an earlier message, what is your goal?

If it is to provide a template for simplify the process of creating
packages for upload to the main archive, then the direction you're
currently heading is fine--presumably the maintainer is sufficiently
clued to deal with the occasional corner-cases (such as epochs,
replacing CORE scripts in /usr/bin, etc).

If it is to provide a binary package for each and every CPAN module,
then I would stand by my suggestion above:  choose a disjoint namespace
and install to /usr/local.  There may well be some overlap b/w some
cases of cpan-foo and lib-foo-perl, but that's not terribly important so long as cpan-* is self-consistent (a couple of redundant Debian packages
is hardly a huge overhead).

If you intend to tackle both tasks, then perhaps you need to provide a
switch to choose the appropriate behaviour.

Both actually... i have a few 'gut feelings' about how we might be able to solve it... do you happen to have a few minutes on irc to talk? just give me your nick + server and i'll be there :)

--

Jos Boumans

	How do I prove I am not crazy to people who are?

	CPANPLUS	http://cpanplus.sf.net



Reply to: