And we'd probably want to have some way in the fink scripts to notify users to install the bundle if they've upgrading their OS version. E.g. maybe we could have postinstall.pl send a message when the current Distribution value doesn't correspond to the current OS version.
On 7/6/12 6:59 AM, David R. Morrison wrote: > Good point. The reason this was done is documented in the perlXXX.info file, > but you are right that it creates potential upgrade problems. > > I guess what we need is a package called perlXXX-upgrade which is a bundle > that depends on all these non-core pm's. Would that solve it, or am I > overlooking something? > > -- Dave > > > On Jul 6, 2012, at 12:13 AM, Daniel Macks wrote: > >> The VirtPackages.pm system-perl packages have extensive Provides lists of >> the various -pmXXX packages. Apple supplies modules with its perl that are >> "extra", not part of the upstream perl-core distro. The VP system-perl >> packages appear to Provides these extra ones as well as the core ones. The >> real perlXXX-core packages do not have the apple extra modules, and so their >> Provides lists are a subset than the VP system-perl ones. >> >> One of the reasons we supply perlXXX-core on distros that support more than >> one OS X version is to enable users to upgrade their OS X, which likely >> involves jumping to a newer system-perl version, without too much headache. >> They can just install fink's perlXXX-core for whatever XXX the previous OS X >> version had (our real perlXXX-core packages are masked out of the >> Distribution that has that XXX as system-perl). Now they still have the same >> perl-version interp, only now it's supplied by fink rather than apple, and I >> assume we expect that users' existing installed set of -pmXXX and other >> things that are tied to that older perl-version would still have a good >> chance of continuing to work. Flaw: this fink perlXXX-core does not Provides >> all the packages that the previous system-perl did, so packages relying on >> them are now broken. The VP system-perl isn't a real dpkg package and the >> system upgrade isn't handled by dpkg, so dpkg doesn't notice that the >> upgrade removed the provider! >> of a package that had reverse-dependencies. >> >> dan >> >> -- >> Daniel Macks >> dma...@netspace.org >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List archive: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
