https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1064995 Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #8 from Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #4) > (In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #3) > > > - %build section should likely use %{__perl} instead of perl > > [...] > I have always been in favor of "%perl" and consider package which are using > perl to be sloppily maintainedd, because it > a) is an absolute path, which avoids picking up an arbitrary "perl" in > $PATH, and thus improves deterministic builds That's very good argument for using absolute paths. > b) the possibility for fedora to ship another perl >> 0 (Perl6, Scls). Current Fedora practice is to install all tools into PATH directories. SCLs redefines PATH (and other variables) for this reason. SCLs encapsulate command invocations with "scl enable" in a spec file. (Though we still use %_perl where we need to edit shebangs.) Perl6 has different executable name. And again any conflicting file names are urged to rename. The only thing which fits into your idea are alternatives. Although alternatives are real problem (however no-go for Plan-9 tools), I believe short commands bring more clarity into the packaging. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review