https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1481324 --- Comment #14 from Tomasz Kłoczko <kloczko.tomasz@xxxxxxxxx> --- > (2) I don't buy the argument with less and more frequent libraries. That was exactly the subject of bug #905482. The consistency. I showed you last build log which proves that what was the case with bug #905482 is *no longer truth today*. I've showed you current current perl-XML-LibXSLT is not linked with gdbm and it not uses it during any stages of build time (build log). As long 4 years ago it was not the same version of the perl module I've checked even old package by downloading from http://vault.centos.org/6.9/os/Source/SPackages/perl-XML-LibXSLT-1.70-1.1.el6.src.rpm affected package and there is no any traces of gdmb in source tree. In Makefile.PL you can find line: $config{LIBS}.=' '.$Config{perllibs}; Which adds use $Config{perllibs} not as you suggesting $Config{libs} !!! Did you had a look on this perl module code before replying that it use(s/d) $Config{libs} ??? >From you side I have only "I don't buy the" and something about contacting perl developers. So what kind of question I should as them or what I should discuss? Really I have no idea how can I reply on this "I don't buy the argument " :( What do you want me to prove or show you? One a side of the subject about remove {gdbm,libdb}-devel .. Why Fedora perl should have in perllibs all those libraries if bu default none of the modules without using any routines from those libraries ABIs are using them? Do you have some kind of working knowledge how linker is working? I can understand that without such knowledge you may have some doubts about emptying perllib however I'm not suggesting this in this ticket and this should be not discussed in scope of this ticket). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
