Kay R�pke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 1) Imagine a repository of lovingly hand-crafted scripts intended for > system maintenance.
I don't envision the 'just the core perl' kit to be useful for general system maintenance tasks. > Suppose it has to be cross platform (at least cross-OS). > I expect a full fledged perl (not necessarily the library!) to be in > /usr/bin/perl. This is at least the 'core + minimal extensions' kit. That's okay. > So I write #!/usr/bin/perl in all of my scripts. > Bang. I have to go through the hassle to either install a full > perl dist You can install one of the smaller kits as well. > or to adapt all of my scripts... There's a price to pay here. When you write a script and put #!/usr/bin/perl on top of it, you expect this perl to provide certain functionality. Personally, I'd only consider the 'just the core' kit (for _very_ special purposes like bootstrapping, configuration, building) and the full kit. And I'd never put the 'just the core' kit in /usr/bin/perl (shudder). > 2) Assumption: If a perl is not capable of doing serious work it > should not reside in /usr/bin/perl. (think of user-space scripts..) > On the other hand, if it *is* is full fledged perl it should have > the god-given right to stay in /usr/bin/perl. For pure system > configuration (build/install time) I guess you need a *full* perl > interpreter. Misperception danger -- what does 'full fledged' mean? Does it mean 'it has everything', or 'it _can_ have everything'? > 1) OS vendors (free or unfree). Most of the applications are data > munging - some kind of sed-on-steroids. (Please prove me wrong > !!). And of course copying files... No need for extending perl. According to my proposal, that would be 'core + practical extensions'. > 2) The average perl user loving the flexibility/power of perl - > occasionally needing a specific module. Needs to be able to extend > perl (library-wise). Doesn't need everything in the full dist. Same. 'core + practical extensions'. > 3) Large site implementations with a very wide range of user needs. > These kinds of installation probably need at least 95% of the full > dist. Needs to able to extend the perl library. Needs almost all. I'd go for 'all'. > So I'm opposed to distribute a perl which is not able to pull together > the full dist on its own. I'd say we agree. -- Johan
