[aur-general] perl-rename and prename

Steve Holmes steve.holmes88 at gmail.com
Sat Dec 19 09:15:39 EST 2009

Hash: RIPEMD160

Well and I thought the general naming convention of cpan modules would
be to prefix them with perl- anyway; isn't that the case?  If that is
so, then perl-rename would make more sense to me.

But then again, I'm sorta new around these parts <smile>.

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Sebastian Schwarz wrote:
> On 2009-12-13 at 23:43 -0500, Ranguvar wrote:
> > I'm thinking I should advise the 'perl-rename' maintainer to take over
> > 'prename' with their PKGBUILD, and then delete 'perl-rename', does
> > anyone not agree?
> As the maintainer of perl-rename let me defend myself.  :)
> On 2009-12-15 at 17:11 +0100, Xyne wrote:
> > Are they really the same?
> No, they aren't.  They are both based on the same script by Larry
> Wall and therefore are quite similar.  However (perl-)rename on CPAN
> is more up-to-date and has some additional functionality and command
> line options.  From what I can see prename is only distributed with
> Debian's Perl package and doesn't have a CPAN/web presence on its own.
> The original maintainer of prename probably chose the name "prename"
> in order to avoid name clashes with /usr/bin/rename from util-linux-ng.
> Nevertheless I adopted and updated prename to Debian's newest version.
> But as perl-rename provides all of prename's functionality and more
> and is better maintained I suggest deleting prename.  I don't care so
> much about the votes but I for my part prefer the name "perl-rename"
> as it is more unambiguous than "prename".  Unfortunately "rename"
> was already taken.  :)
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the aur-general mailing list