Re: Bug#735134: perl: rename(1) is ancient
- To: debian-perl@lists.debian.org
- Cc: stuart@debian.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#735134: perl: rename(1) is ancient
- From: Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>
- Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2014 15:57:00 -0800
- Message-id: <[🔎] 87lhxt2hmb.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
- In-reply-to: <52eed80d.a642420a.5019.fffff6ad@mx.google.com> (Stuart Prescott's message of "Mon, 03 Feb 2014 10:43:06 +1100")
- References: <20140112235410.7150.99481.reportbug@eudyptes> <20140114203428.GA14615@estella.local.invalid> <20140114205904.GI8057@rzlab.ucr.edu> <20140118153429.GF26815@urchin.earth.li> <20140202151231.GO26815@urchin.earth.li> <52eed80d.a642420a.5019.fffff6ad@mx.google.com>
Stuart Prescott <stuart@debian.org> writes:
>> 2) Make libfile-rename-perl be Standard, to match perl, without adding
>> any dependencies.
> So to pursue option 2 and take prename outside the build-essential set,
> either some checking and bug filing needs to be done, or follow the lintian
> strategy and add a test for use of rename/prename in d/rules and lintian is
> both the prod to encourage change and metric of progress.
We could also just add the new package to build-essential. It would look
a little odd, but "it's always been part of build-essential" is a pretty
good reason to leave it there, and it's a fairly small package.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: