Re: perl wrapper and PATH

2002-06-09 Thread Doug Barton
Garance A Drosihn wrote: > > At 12:48 PM +0200 6/9/02, Anton Berezin wrote: > >On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 02:14:09PM -0400, Trish Lynch wrote: > > > > > Anton, if you don;t get around to it this weekend, mind > > > if I take a stab at it? > > > >No, I don't mind at all. If only we can agree who d

Re: perl wrapper and PATH

2002-06-09 Thread Garance A Drosihn
At 12:48 PM +0200 6/9/02, Anton Berezin wrote: >On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 02:14:09PM -0400, Trish Lynch wrote: > > > Anton, if you don;t get around to it this weekend, mind > > if I take a stab at it? > >No, I don't mind at all. If only we can agree who does what. :-( RPI has been running with

Re: perl wrapper and PATH

2002-06-09 Thread Doug Barton
Bill Fenner wrote: > > I know that the specific mergemaster issues have been addressed, but I > thought this experience pointed out something subtly astonishing, so I > figured I'd point it out. > > I ran mergemaster, and the perl wrapper started complaining that I > needed to install perl, so I

Re: perl wrapper and PATH

2002-06-09 Thread Anton Berezin
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 02:14:09PM -0400, Trish Lynch wrote: > Anton, if you don;t get around to it this weekend, mind if I take a > stab at it? No, I don't mind at all. If only we can agree who does what. :-( Cheers, \Anton. -- | Anton Berezin| FreeBSD: The power to ser

Re: perl wrapper and PATH

2002-06-08 Thread Trish Lynch
On Sat, 8 Jun 2002, David O'Brien wrote: > On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 05:07:39PM +0200, Anton Berezin wrote: > > It sounds reasonable, but what's the point of having a wrapper at all > > then? > > One way or the other we need to have /usr/bin/perl exist and be usable. > Many have perl scripts in ~/b

Re: perl wrapper and PATH

2002-06-08 Thread David O'Brien
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 05:07:39PM +0200, Anton Berezin wrote: > It sounds reasonable, but what's the point of having a wrapper at all > then? One way or the other we need to have /usr/bin/perl exist and be usable. Many have perl scripts in ~/bin that they expect to run on all modern OS's -- whi

Re: perl wrapper and PATH

2002-06-08 Thread Anton Berezin
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 09:48:05AM -0400, Trish Lynch wrote: > The wrapper is there so that there are no suprises to people that > *expect* perl in the system. > What would possibly be a good idea is that the wrapper is there, but > it doesn;t actually redirect to the new perl. Then use.perl is

Re: perl wrapper and PATH

2002-06-08 Thread Trish Lynch
On Sat, 8 Jun 2002, John Hay wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 11:26:18PM -0700, Bill Fenner wrote: > > > I ran "use.perl port", and that gave me a working perl for mergemaster. > > > Interestingly, "use.perl system" didn't give me back the perl wrapper; > > > I'm not sure what I got. Sigh. > >

Re: perl wrapper and PATH

2002-06-08 Thread John Hay
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 11:26:18PM -0700, Bill Fenner wrote: > > I ran "use.perl port", and that gave me a working perl for mergemaster. > > Interestingly, "use.perl system" didn't give me back the perl wrapper; > > I'm not sure what I got. Sigh. > > That script predates the removal of perl fr

Re: perl wrapper and PATH

2002-06-08 Thread Szilveszter Adam
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 11:26:18PM -0700, Bill Fenner wrote: > I ran "use.perl port", and that gave me a working perl for mergemaster. > Interestingly, "use.perl system" didn't give me back the perl wrapper; > I'm not sure what I got. Sigh. That script predates the removal of perl from the base