Re: Bug#677865: Re: Bug#677865: dpkg-gencontrol warns about 'File::FcntlLock not available'
- To: Guillem Jover <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, Gerfried Fuchs <email@example.com>, Julien Cristau <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Bug#677865: Re: Bug#677865: dpkg-gencontrol warns about 'File::FcntlLock not available'
- From: Niko Tyni <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 23:06:17 +0300
- Message-id: <20140516200617.GA682@estella.local.invalid>
- Mail-followup-to: Guillem Jover <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, Gerfried Fuchs <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Julien Cristau <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <20140516155425.GA26395@gaara.hadrons.org>
- References: <20140516090535.GA2934@toerring.de> <20140516155425.GA26395@gaara.hadrons.org>
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 05:54:26PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 11:05:35 +0200, Jens Thoms Toerring wrote:
> > > Long term what I think would be best would be to get File::FcntlLock
> > > into the perl core distribution, preferably upstream, but I'm not sure
> > > how such proposals are handled there and if something like that would
> > > be feasible, Jens what do you think? And/or would that be possible in
> > > Debian, maybe in the interim or regardless of perl core upstream?
> > I've never considered trying to get this module included into
> > the Perl core distribution (and I also wouldn't know how to
> > get started with something like that;-)
> I'd assume a proposal needs to be sent to perl5-porters? But I've
> skimmed a bit over its archives, and I don't see anything obvious
> there. The debian-perl folks will know most probably.
I'm not aware of any documented process for this. The perl5-porters
list is certainly the right place to bring it up.
Generally, I think the aim is to make the core leaner so the bar probably
is (or at least should be) quite high. OTOH at least IO::Socket::IP did
make it in relatively recently.
I'm not very enthusiastic about including it as a Debian specific
bundling, but I'm not ruling that out totally.
> > Unfortunately, I also
> > don't see any way to do things without XS since the flock
> > structure that must be passed to fcntl(2) can be quite dif-
> > ferent on different systems, both concerning the number and
> > ordering of its members as well as the sizes of them:-( I
> > would love to hear ideas on how to do it differently, i.e.
> > with Perl-only methods!
Would it be possible to probe for the contents of the flock struct with C
code at build time, and then use that information to write out a pure perl
module that regenerates the structs at run time (probably with pack())?
It would still be architecture dependent (and thus go in
vendorarch/sitearch) but it wouldn't need a rebuild across Perl upgrades.
Niko Tyni email@example.com