On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 06:14:19PM +0200, Stepan Kasal wrote:
> Let's imagine that @INC would be the following:
>
> /usr/lib/perl5/5.10.0 -Darchlib=%{_libdir}/perl5/%{perl_version}
> /usr/share/perl5/5.10.0 -Dprivlib=%{_prefix}/share/perl5/%{perl_version}
> /usr/local/lib/perl5 -Dsitearch=%{_prefix}/local/%{_lib}/perl5
> /usr/local/share/perl5 -Dsitelib=%{_prefix}/local/share/perl5
> /usr/lib/perl5 -Dvendorarch=%{_libdir}/perl5
> /usr/share/perl5 -Dvendorlib=%{_prefix}/share/perl5
>
> What would be wrong if we switched to this simple layout?
I think that would have been the right thing to do when we switched to
5.10.0. At this point, I'm not so sure. It would mean rebuilding all
perl-* packages *again*.
Also, I seem to recall some objection to creating directories in
/usr/local, even if they were empty.
Steve
--
Steven Pritchard - K&S Pritchard Enterprises, Inc.
Email: steve@xxxxxxxxx http://www.kspei.com/
Phone: (618)624-4440 Mobile: (618)567-7320
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-perl-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
