does mc really require perl*?

Michael Schwendt mschwendt at
Sat Sep 21 17:28:40 UTC 2013

On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 10:11:12 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:

> >

> The problem is that many (most?) programs won't handle this well.  For
> example, how does mc handle having its perl scripts installed but
> non-functional? 

The "missing extfs.d script" case is trivial. MC simply doesn't offer
a virtual filesystem for the file type.

If the script interpreter is missing, it prints a detailed "bad
interpreter" error.

> In addition, the package managers need some way later to easily install
> uninstalled soft dependencies, so when mc doesn't work, someone can just
> say "add what's needed", rather than end-users having to hunt down what
> is really required to make the external scripts work.

Perhaps similar to a reinstall of "mc", asking the user about what
optional deps to add. And hopefully it's not subpackages that contain
optional deps with the user running into trouble finding the package
which to reinstall/enhance.

More information about the devel mailing list