[arch-dev-public] [RFC] Perl configuration revisited

Florian Pritz bluewind at xinu.at
Wed Jun 11 04:18:37 EDT 2014

On 11.06.2014 09:47, Justin Davis wrote:
> If you version the vendor dirs the following scenario will play out.
> People will upgrade perl. No sigfaults, yay! Then they will wonder why
> perl says their modules are not installed, when pacman says that, yes
> indeed they are. Which modules? They don't quite know. Heck, they
> might not even notice until a week after they upgrade. In the end the
> result will be the same, they will still need to reinstall and/or rebuild
> modules, but it will be less obvious what the problem is.

I'm not sure about that one. If modules are in a versioned dir it's way
easier to run find on that dir and get a list of stuff that is clearly
broken than it is right now.

My find-broken-perl-packages.sh script tries to find them now, but that
generates quite a few false positives because some modules just don't
support direct loading (perl -MFoo::Bar -e1). Because of that I don't
link it directly in the news post, but that obviously won't stop people
from following a longer link chain anyway and then not being able to
understand the output. I believe that would be easier if we version the dir.

People sometimes upgrade partially and then complain (yes happened with
5.20), sometimes packages will be rebuilt against the wrong perl even if
the same packager builds all his other pkgs against the right one (yes
happened with 5.20) and also don't forget that cpanplus-dist-arch
installs to vendor_perl so user-built stuff is also there.

Telling people to check if the dir doesn't exist and otherwise run `find
.. -exec pacman -Qqo {} + | sort -u` seems way easier than my current

I agree it might be less obvious if you don't know we do that though,
but I'll post news announcements with the command in there.

> core_perl has no reason to versioned as far as I understand it. There
> can be only one! But yes, please... for the love of all that is holy,
> version the site_perl directory.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20140611/6244d901/attachment.asc>

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list