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

Re: "Avoiding the vendor perl fad diet"

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Stefan Hornburg (Racke)
<racke@linuxia.de> wrote:
> On 01/31/2012 01:48 PM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Damyan Ivanov<dmn@debian.org>  wrote:
>>> Here's my recipe for deploying Perl applications:
>>>  * ensure every dependency is packaged for Debian. If not, package it
>>>   (this was why I joined the Debian Perl group :)
>>>  * develop with current versions from Debian/unstable
>>>  * deploy application as a Debian package, with proper dependencies
>>>  * profit
>>> Works very nice even for applications that have only one instance in
>>> production and is a killer for multi-instance deployments.
>> Running Debian/unstable on a production machine sounds very risky.
>> If I understand, that means a lot of things are unstable
>> and I constantly need to upgrade. Even the kernel.
>> Which means frequent reboots as well. Right?
> He said "develop with current versions", so I would presume that he runs
> Debian/stable or Debian/testing on production.

Wow, that's now unclear to me.
Can someone "develop with current versions from Debian/unstable",
package missing dependencies (which if I understand correctly go into unstable)
and then use those packages on a Debian/testing or Debian/stable system?
What if perl has been upgraded between those?

I know so little about Debian (and every other distro).


Reply to: