awesome thanks. On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Petr Šabata <contyk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Matt, > > I see scottchiefbaker linked your Reddit convo[0] on #fedora-perl > but left before anybody could answer his question. I'm not on > Reddit so I'll just comment here; perhaps you can forward that :) > > The way perls packaged is intentional and small installation > footprint wasn't, as far as I know, the reason. It was more > of a general modular (ha) packaging rule -- perl, as a source > package, is the same as whatever upstream ships in their tarball. > It is then split into subpackages, where perl is just the > interpreter and dozens of the bundled modules are available > as subpackages. The same perl modules are also available as > standalone packages so they can be updated. This allows people > (and packages) install only what they need which is rarely the > entire installation of perl which, among other things, pulls in > gcc and the entire C development toolchain. That's the default > upstream perl experience, after all. Doing so in Fedora was > deemed unacceptable. > > People who expect the whole thing can always install perl-core. > Perhaps there could be a 'Perl Development' comps group, too, > to make this option more visible. > > Using weak dependencies would install C development tools on > practically every system by default. I don't think that's the > answer here. > > P > > P.S. The list is fine ;) Maybe someone else can comment or > correct my possibly false statements above. > > [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/6fu9ma/im_matthew_miller_fedora_project_leader_ama/dil9mwh/?context=3 -- Matthew Miller • Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
