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

Re: Mandating use of /usr/bin/perl in Policy


since I was just hurt by this irrelevant change in the policy where
I have to patch 59 scripts, or auto-search through a few Gb of 
sources on package build time, I repeat by disagreement:

> > Disagree. I think forcing this is not good. We should at least have
> >   /usr/bin/env perl
> > as allowed option, too. There *are* reasons why a sysadm wants to
> > replace the perl shipped in Debian, or wants to override/test things.
> > Having hard-coded /usr/bin/perl there is not optimal.
> No, for perl programs shipped by Debian, that can only be expected
> to work reliably if invoked with /usr/bin/perl - any other perl that 
> happens to be in a user's $PATH might not have the correct modules installed,
> or might have other behavioural differences that break things. Note that

This is completely straw man argument. 

We are NOT HERE to hold the sysadmins hand. If someone sets up a perl
that is in the PATH before the one in /usr/bin, it is the users

This is a completely unnecessary complication and breakage of consistent
usage across decades.

> Speaking to your arguments, the user is of course free to use a different
> perl for applications installed locally, but this should not be the case
> for packages in Debian.

Disagree completely here. I as sysadm want to feel free to replace perl
by putting it in the front of the PATH. It is NOT your job to prevent
me. ANd I expect Perl programs to honor this setting.

I tend to open an RC bug against the policy.


PREINING Norbert                               http://www.preining.info
Accelia Inc.     +    JAIST     +    TeX Live     +    Debian Developer
GPG: 0x860CDC13   fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13

Reply to: