On 04/07/13 11:49, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 09:55:25AM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
On 04/07/13 08:49, Christopher Meng wrote:
Well, then just write them up in the guidelines, I follow the rules.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Perl#Perl_Requires_and_Provides
"It is recommended to buildrequire core modules explicitly,
because they can move between sub-packages or disappear
from core perl."
'use strict' and 'use warnings' are implemented in the interpreter.
There exists 'strict.pm' and 'warnings.pm' modules, but all they do is
to set internal compiler flags, causing the interpreter to emit the
errors/warnings as it processes the code. They are just thin wrappers
and splitting them off from core perl would make no sense.
I agree, and alluded to that before. I personally haven't included any
non-dual-lived modules as buildreqs in my own perl module packages.
However, from the point of view of consistency and simplicity, it's safe
to build-require anything that a package "use"s, "require"s etc., i.e.
it's harmless to add them, and the omission of core module buildreqs has
caused problems in the past, e.g. when Data::Dumper and Digest::MD5 were
sub-packaged. So I wouldn't be averse to a guideline that said to
include all of them, even if they were implemented in the interpreter,
as that's easier to understand and check than a potentially long list of
pragmas and other exceptions.
Paul.
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
