On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Ned Ludd wrote: > On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 18:27 -0400, Ren� Rh�aume wrote: > > > Still probably no harm in having a minimalistic perl around in the > > > portage tree. We just cant promote such ideas and being any part of > > > proper embedded solutions due to file size and memory/cpu consumption > > > that goes along with using perl itself. > > Exactly, I would like a minimalistic Perl, not pushing Perl into > > embedded systems really. I just thought embedded projects like cutting > > the fat. Sorry for the inconvenience my wording caused. As miniperl > > means trouble, I will try the perl-base way. > > You should file a bug at bugs.gentoo.org for [EMAIL PROTECTED] when you have > ebuild patches ready to go. You will probably want to key this > functionality on the minimal USE flag perhaps.
One of the problems perl exposes (bugged one maintainer, but no answer), is that each time you rebuild it, it builds .ph versions of all the installed .h headers (the more pkgs in the mean time on the dev box, the more files). All distros I have seen limit the creation to some well-known/really needed files (they check if a pkg is installed, get the list of headers from pkg, and build only those). Such a behaviour could be also desired at least for USE=minimal. Peter -- Peter S. Mazinger <ps dot m at gmx dot net> ID: 0xA5F059F2 Key fingerprint = 92A4 31E1 56BC 3D5A 2D08 BB6E C389 975E A5F0 59F2 -- [email protected] mailing list
