xdg-utils does not depend on perl; all the tools are in shell. You should talk to your distro. J. Leclanche
2015-01-16 22:11 GMT+01:00 Steven Stewart-Gallus <sstewartgallu...@mylangara.bc.ca>: > Hello. > > I'm just some random guy but anyways. > > As a user and administrator, I dislike excess dependencies on my > system such as Perl but can always just remove the xdg-utils package > if I really want to, so having xdg-utils depend on Perl isn't that bad > a thing. > > As a programmer, I don't think C is that bad a language but I also > think that not everything has to be in C and as much as I personally > detest and hate Perl POSIX shell scripting is much worse. > > About the pluggable backends thing. I think that would lead to a much > cleaner design and also potentially a much lighter system (one could > not have installed an xdg-utils-gnome package, an xdg-utils-kde > package, etc..). However, I also somewhat think that this sort of > genericity maybe should be done via interfaces like DBus because the > traditional Unix approach of a program spawning off a helper program > is really clunky. First off, helper programs aren't very good at > error handling. Helper programs just write errors to standard error > and it isn't possible to handle these errors well and maybe retry with > a different tactic. Secondly, helper programs are kind of wasteful in > that they spawn off a whole process. Maybe I'm just over thinking and > over complicating the issue though. After all, these are just little > helper utilities. But still, having separate binaries for backends > isn't the only form of genericity. > > Thank you, > Steven Stewart-Gallus > _______________________________________________ > xdg mailing list > xdg@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list xdg@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg