About placement of dual-life modules

[Robin Lee]

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Petr Pisar <ppisar at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:00:46PM +0800, Robin Lee wrote:
>>
>> Some dual-life modules, like PathTools and CGI, are placed within
>> vendor path in Fedora 15. This situation is not expected by some
>> applications, for example, "cpanm -L" command will definitely fail if
>> an installing package needs such dual-life modules.
>>
> This is problem of that applications. They should not expect exact location.
>
> Formally, some packagers wanted to install all Fedora modules into core. But
> there are some RPM-related problems (files in debuginfo subpackages would
> conflict because debug data are delivered by one subpackage for all
> subpackages together) and some packagers were against it.
I agree that this is the true obstacle.

>
>> So, why not just exclude such modules in perl.spec,
> Because the meaning of dual-lived packages is to live together (in Fedora
> repository, not in system). The idea is users are not disturbed by
> updating all perl core subpackages just for sake of upgrading a core module.
>
>> and place the updated dual-life modules to site paths?
>>
> Site? Site is for third-party modules. If Fedora installed packages into site,
> where would user install their software?
Oh, sorry... s/site/vendor/ .

>
>
> I think cpan* should be (pre)configured to install into site instead of
> vendor.
>
> -- Petr
>
> --
> Fedora Extras Perl SIG
> http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
> perl-devel mailing list
> perl-devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
>