Chip Salzenberg, in an immanent manifestation of deity, wrote: >What he said. Perl's upstream maintainers have toyed with putting >libperl.so in $(prefix)/lib, but they (we!) have learned not to try.
Okay. I was thinking about it some and I agree that it probably won't be profitable. Still, I think I'll probably need to write an autocloser for everyone who tells me that the shared library is in the wrong location. Note that I've encountered a problem in building the libperl. I was just going to have it be it's own arch ($cpu-$system-shared). But then I realized that this would mean that all the various arch dependent packages will have to be recompiled for it such as DBI and PerlMagick. So, given the following criteria: 1) A shared Perl for the regular distribution is an unacceptable hit for those people not using shared Perl. 2) There will have to be a shared Perl binary to run the various build utilities at the very least 3) Having multiple packages changed only by arch ($cpu-$system) is probably undesirable. Which of the following should be done: 1) Write a script that sways Config.pm and friends out so the appropriate values are found by the appropriate tools. Investigate if there problems with using non-shared Perl while linking as well as running it while Config.pm says it is shared 2) Ignore criteria #3 and just be forced to build multiple Perl versions of packages. Either is doable. #2 was the original plan but that might not be acceptable. Looking for opinions. Darren -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.daft.com/~torin> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Darren Stalder/2608 Second Ave, @282/Seattle, WA 98121-1212/USA/+1-800-921-4996 @ Sysadmin, webweaver, postmaster for hire. C/Perl/CGI/Pilot programmer/tutor @ @ Make a little hot-tub in your soul. @
