Hello Brendan, Brendan O'Dea [2010-11-11 20:03 +1100]: > Out of curiosity, is there a particular reason why you would like to > remove Perl? We are always looking for ways to fight the overflow of our installation CDs, and also we just generally want to have a lean and mean system. Perl (and in general, language runtimes) isn't something that the average desktop user expects to find in a default installation, so it's one of the things which would help to free up install and CD space (8 MB for perl itself, and an extra 5 to 10 for dropped extra perl modules) without impacting desktop features. We have also faced this problem a lot for custom projects. E. g. we are working a lot in the ARM hardware space these days, where we often have requirements to fit an entire (small) desktop into a 512 MB root partition. I was able to do that with a lot of tricks [1], one of which was to remove Perl. (Of course in these kinds of projects you just have one hardware configuration and a well defined set of use cases, so you can pretty much completely throw general policies over board). > Right. Pulling apart the Perl packages into separate chunks at all > was contentious with upstream and not supported, but we got by because > in general all of Perl was installed by default, excepting the docs > which we worked around the docs with a diversion. Shipping just > perl-base by default will not go down well. Ah, so you think that splitting out packages from perl-modules shouldn't be done then? Thanks, Martin [1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReducingDiskFootprint -- Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature