* Reindl Harald [31/10/2012 22:44] : > > any upstream-script the next years will use #!/bin/perl and > it would be idiotic to write patches for every application > only becasue fdora decided to make UsrMove Historically, we've always patch upstreams that use non-existant-on-Fedora paths (like /bin/perl, /usr/local/bin/python, /opt/bin/ruby, ...) to use the path that exists in Fedora. Treating /bin differently from everything else doesn't sound logical. * Ben Rosser [31/10/2012 22:44] : > > I'm not a Perl programmer... but shouldn't scripts be using something like > #!/usr/bin/env perl rather than hardcoding #!/bin/perl anyway? That's the > way Python scripts have been written for years (#!/usr/bin/env python), > long before UsrMove. If you're patching the scripts in your package, it make more sense to use the correct path and avoid the performance hit. If you're submitting patches to upstream, they may demand an env-style shebang. * Toshio Kuratomi [31/10/2012 22:44] : > > UsrMove was a Fedora specific distribution change. As such, patching of > applications to use /usr/bin/perl instead of /bin/perl is a distribution > change that we should be making as well. >From bug #871503 (and I apologize if I'm reading this wrong), it appears that the dependency on /bin/perl is being caused by the hardcoded $PATH in openssh. To fix the problem, I think we would not only need to provide /bin/perl but a /bin equivalent to everything in /usr/bin (/bin/perl is the only usecase which Harald has hit so far). Emmanuel -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
