Why don't we use perl_select?
> 11 июня 2014 г., в 18:27, "Daniel J. Luke" <dl...@geeklair.net> написал(а): > >> On Jun 11, 2014, at 4:44 AM, Mojca Miklavec <mo...@macports.org> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Mark Anderson wrote: >>> I sadly have not had enough time to work on cpan-mp, I've been mostly >>> learning the internals of macports first. But yeah, like I said on that >>> other thread, the latest perl is enough. Back when 5.x stalled because >>> everyone thought 6 was coming out it was ok to stay still. But now we get >>> new Perls regularly. >> >> There's probably nothing wrong with providing just the latest version >> of Perl, but in order to do that one has to fix 1000+ packages and/or >> properly implement the cpan2mp functionality (and redesign the >> packages) before this can be done. > > why? it's not worse that what we have now (which is really the same set of > problems multiplied by the number of different perls we have + the explosion > of +perlX.Y variants that other ports need to support having different perls > installed). > >> There is one thing I fear a bit though if there was really just a >> single version supported: nobody would dare to upgrade perl when a new >> release comes out. And the upgrade scenario needs to be really well >> thought-out in advance, as well as a chance to test pre-releases >> locally (let's say an easy way for any macports user to switch to Perl >> 2.21 and keep everything working properly). > > I'll assume you mean 5.21, not 2.21 (and that by 5.21 you really mean 5.22) > > I just did a perl upgrade on a few (production) machines (perl 5.18 to perl > 5.20 via perlbrew) and it went relatively smoothly - there were a couple of > modules that I did have to track down patches for, but nothing major (in > fact, almost everything built just fine, but a couple of things needed > patches to pass their test suites - but of course my set of installed modules > might be vastly different from other people's). Being able to stage/revert is > important. > > As things are now, it's a pain to move from one perl version to another > because you have to install the new perl (and maybe reinstall the perl5 port > to get symlinks that make you happy), generate a list of installed perl > modules, install new versions of those perl modules (assuming they've all > been updated to include the new perl and they all use the perl5 portgroup). > > It would be /much/ nicer if you could just do port upgrade outdated and have > macports install a new perl and rebuild all of the perl modules you had > installed for the new perl. Maybe it would be possible for MP (or one of us) > to set up a build machine that would just run through the new perl and all of > the perl modules before we commit a major upgrade (giving us at least a list > of the modules that fail and need attention). > > -- > Daniel J. Luke > +========================================================+ > | *---------------- dl...@geeklair.net ----------------* | > | *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* | > +========================================================+ > | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | > | reflect the opinions of my employer. | > +========================================================+ > > > > _______________________________________________ > macports-dev mailing list > macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org > https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
