On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 10:43:50AM -0400, Johnny C. Lam wrote:
> Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@antioche.lip6.fr> writes:
> > Hi,
> > 3 weeks ago I posted a proposal to properly handle path in perl module
> > packages (see http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-pkg/2000/08/03/0003.html).  
> > So far the only comments I got were from Hubert, and he was happy with it.
> > So if noone object I'll commit these changes (along with the few things
> > Hubert suggested) and start convert packages.
> 
> I recently updated textproc/eperl on 15 August to deal with this
> problem, since I had perl-5.6.0 installed and was unwilling to
> downgrade to perl-5.004_04.  From the commit log for
> textproc/eperl/Makefile:
> 
>     Make this work and de-install properly with perl5 + perl5-current.
> 
>     Include code in the Makefile to show how to use the installed .packlist
>     to dynamically generate a PLIST for this package.  I couldn't use the
>     solution proposed on tech-pkg since eperl installed some stuff in
>     ${PERL5_SITELIB} under perl-5.00404, but in ${PERL_SITEARCH} under
>     perl-5.6.0.  I imagine other modules will also show this difficulty
>     since the Makefile for eperl was generated by ExtUtils::MakeMaker, so I
>     think the .packlist way is the right thing to do.
> 
> That the files were installed in different places (SITELIB/SITEARCH)
> made it impossible for me to use the suggestion that you had outlined
> in your proposal.  Perhaps you could comment on the alternative
> solution I cobbled together for using the installed .packlist to
> generate a PLIST.

Arg, bad news. Well, my perl-current was still at 5.00503 when I did this :(
Hum, using the .packlist can be a nice way of doing it too. For most module
packages the original PLIST would end up in something nearly empty.

Maybe we could factor this out create a 'mk/perl.pkg.mk' ?

--
Manuel Bouyer, LIP6, Universite Paris VI.           Manuel.Bouyer@lip6.fr
--