On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 04:12:37AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> Anton Berezin wrote:
> > The compatibility is a moot point either way, since there was no NO_PERL
> > knob - it used to be called NOPERL.
> It's NOPERL in -stable, but it was NO_PERL in -current when I changed it
> to NO_PERL_WRAPPER.
My point was that it *was* NOPERL in -current before the removal of
perl. But I see you handle this case in your patch to use.perl, so no
> > That's fine, but I am still trying to understand why do we need a
> > wrapper at all. As was indicated (on IRC, not sure it was mentioned in
> > the mail threads), the ability to launch /usr/bin/perl with no perl in
> > the system is different from the inability to launch anything at all.
> Personally, I don't think we need a wrapper, as long as the use.perl
> script knows how to DTRT.
My point exactly.
> However, given that currently we have a wrapper I thought fixing
> use.perl to handle it was reasonable.
The keyword here is `currently'. :-)
| Anton Berezin | FreeBSD: The power to serve |
| catpipe Systems ApS _ _ |_ | http://www.FreeBSD.org |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] (_(_|| | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| +45 7021 0050 | Private: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message