On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 02:41:57PM -0500, Daniel J. Luke wrote: > +1 from me. It would probably also be a good idea to make it perl5.14 > +threads (and if a non-threaded perl is needed, it should probably be a > separate port) at the same time.
Good point about: +threads. As Eric Cronin pointed out yesterday in https://trac.macports.org/ticket/33105#comment:5 because the modules are installed in a different place for perl5 +threads, any perl modules installed using binary packages won't work correctly if perl is built with +threads. That seems like a fairly serious problem. If we're OK with only providing perl +threads, we wouldn't have to worry about it. (I don't know enough about perl to know if there's anything that needs a non-threaded perl -- I got the impression that it was important in the past but is rarely if ever needed these days.) Dan -- Dan R. K. Ports MIT CSAIL http://drkp.net/ _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
