On 12/2/05, Chris Devers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Historically, Unix users could depend on a copy of Perl in /usr/bin from > their vendor, and maybe a custom-installed one somewhere like /opt/bin > or /usr/local/bin. With that in mind, using one of those paths usually > would do something useful. > > Anyway, there isn't anything stopping you from doing the same sort of > thing with your Perl scripts, but, out of habit as much as anything > else, this isn't how most Perl hackers write their code. I don't see > much harm in it though, and I could picture it making some scripts more > portable if they're going to be running on systems where you can't > depend on a copy of the Perl binary being in one of the usual places.
I see your point, Chris. What I was thinking about was the trouble to realocate the interpreter if you have a perl binary instead of compiling it from the source. If you use a perl compiled to be in "/usr/local/bin" in a different path like '/home/me/bin', it works sometimes and other times it will fail because of path assumptions, which I don't know exactly what they are. This mostly happens with Perl modules dependent on shared libraries. Adriano. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://learn.perl.org/> <http://learn.perl.org/first-response>
