[Bug 1064995] Review Request: perl-File-Slurp-Tiny - A simple, sane and efficient file slurper

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1064995



--- Comment #6 from Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 at freenet.de> ---
(In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #5)
> (In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #3)
> > > > - %build section should likely use %{__perl} instead of perl
> > > 
> > > The guidelines generally discourage the use of macros for commands except
> > > where there's a need for the command path to be configurable, and cites
> > > %{__python} as an example. In Fedora there have been parallel python2 and
> > > python3 stacks so that might seem a reasonable example but Fedora has never
> > > shipped more than one version of perl and so there's not really a need for
> > > configurability here. So I prefer the tidier, shorter version.
> > I have always been in favor of "%perl" and consider package which are using
> > perl to be sloppily maintainedd, because it
> > a) is an absolute path, which avoids picking up an arbitrary "perl" in
> > $PATH, and thus improves deterministic builds
> 
> I agree with this but FPC clearly don't care about this because the
> guidelines discourage the use of macros for commands generally (e.g.
> "%__cp", "%__mv"), in favour of unadorned commands. It's a bit pointless
> doing this for some commands but not all. 
It's not a secret that I am in violent disagreement with FPC on this matter and
consider enforcing perl in reviews greasy kiddy stuff.

> > b) the possibility for fedora to ship another perl >> 0 (Perl6, Scls).
> 
> Mechanisms for achieving these have yet to be determined,#
Thanks to the widely spread mistake of using perl instead of %__perl this will
be a pretty tough exercise.

> and quite possibly
> would not involve the %__perl macro.
My view: %__perl points to the "system default perl", which today happens to be
/usr/bin/perl, which happens to be perl5. If %__perl was used consistently, all
of perl could be switched to a future perl version at once.
Anyway, I do not see perl6 to arrive any time soon.

> For instance, the dual python stacks in
> Fedora are handled using separate %__python2 and %__python3 macros rather
> than redefining %__python.
Well, the situation on __python is really messed up, IMO. %__python should
point to the system default python, while there is nothing wrong in having
%__python2 and %__python3 to support packages with specific demands.

Anyway, this is way off-topic for a review.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component