On Thu May 01 15:34:17 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Coke,
>
> This has been come up a couple of times either on list or on #parrot.
> And the same question has been raised about config/auto/m4.pm.
>
> Other things being equal, I'm in favor of this. Hey! Two fewer config
> steps to have to maintain or test!
>
> But then I grepped for the string 'python' (upper or lower case) in the
> distro and came up with the list of files attached. Before we remove
> config/auto/python.pm, we should assess what the impact would be on each
> of these 81 files -- which includes a lot of source code.
Just because they reference python doesn't mean they reference this
config step.
Looks like the debian pkg incorrectly reports that we require python as
well ("ports/debian/control.in"), and the win32 readme mentions the
config step. And the test references the step.
Looks safe to rip out. the references to "python" that aren't to the
config module can be left alone.
> kid51
>
