On Wed, Mar 06, 2002, Michael Schloh wrote:
> [...]
> New package perl-www.
Ok, that's fine. But what prompted you for this? I mean it currently
(still) horribly conflicts with LWP from the "perl" package. Sure,
I've on my TODO list to split all the extra packages from "perl" into
"perl-std" (and the other "perl-xxx"). But then in "perl-www" there have
to also the URI module and a few others. So what is your intention? Are
you already working on removing the extra modules from "perl" or was
this just a one-shot? At least, keep in mind that it conflicts with LWP
from "perl"...
> Version: 5.64
> Release: 20020306
Bundles (consisting of multiple modules) have Version the same as
Release. Yes, I know, you currently just have libwww-perl here, but as I
explained above, there will be more in the future. So use 20020306 for
Version, please.
> [...]
> The libwww-perl collection is a set of Perl modules which provides
> a simple and consistent application programming interface to the
> World-Wide Web.
> #URI::Attr
> #URI::Escape
> #URI::URL
> [...]
Can you reformat (or just remove) this list to be shorter in lines, please?
> [...]
> # make sure our Perl is used
> # FIXME, is this redundant or necessary?
> perl=%{l_prefix}/bin/perl
> %{l_shtool} subst \
> -e "s:\$^X:'$perl':g" \
> `find . -name Makefile.PL -print`
Sorry, I do not understand the question? What and why is there anything
redundant? The $perl is used later. Seems like I missed the point. Can
you clarify, Michael?
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org
Developer Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
