Steffen Mueller wrote: > http://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=19030 > > Finally, we have https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=18536
Oops, I just added a comment to #19030 before reading up on #18536. As explained in my comment to #19030, pp'ed executables (on any ELF system, e.g. Linux and Solaris) are _not_ valid ELF files because they have stuff appended that is not reflected in the ELF headers. The packaging process must be told not to subject these executables to the usual scrutiny (for Debian packages this means simply excluding the pp'ed executables from dh_strip, for RPMs I dunno). If that's not possible or acceptable, we would have to change pp to generate valid ELF (which forces also changes to the unpacking code). Cheers, Roderich
