Re: does mc really require perl*?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 10:11:12 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:

> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1006954

> The problem is that many (most?) programs won't handle this well.  For
> example, how does mc handle having its perl scripts installed but
> non-functional? 

The "missing extfs.d script" case is trivial. MC simply doesn't offer
a virtual filesystem for the file type.

If the script interpreter is missing, it prints a detailed "bad
interpreter" error.

> In addition, the package managers need some way later to easily install
> uninstalled soft dependencies, so when mc doesn't work, someone can just
> say "add what's needed", rather than end-users having to hunt down what
> is really required to make the external scripts work.

Perhaps similar to a reinstall of "mc", asking the user about what
optional deps to add. And hopefully it's not subpackages that contain
optional deps with the user running into trouble finding the package
which to reinstall/enhance.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux