[lfs-dev] LFS 7.10: 2.2. Host System Requirements: Perl version OK: module missing

Bruce Dubbs bruce.dubbs at gmail.com
Tue Dec 13 13:52:20 PST 2016


akhiezer wrote:

> In light of the new instance, 'Getopt/Std.pm', pointing to the general
> issue of how much to include in the version-check page: I'd agree
> broadly that one doesn't want to treat libraries/&c (if at all) in the
> same way as the other 'main' items in version-check.
>
> If they are to be omitted, then maybe a small para/item on the page
> noting the issue, could be useful; although it too perhaps could
> 'tend[s] to confuse more than it helps'. Maybe just say something
> that includes s'thing like, roughly, "[...] most testing with full,
> and not heavily-modified, installs of the main well-known distros;
> and less tested with other distros or roll-your-own systems.

Yes, I was thinking about doing something like that.

> However, staying with the 'include-all' idea for a moment: might
> version-check be extendable and generalised to a './configure ...'-style
> test for what's on the host-os system -vs- what is known to be required.

I think that would be overkill.  One advantage with the current system is 
its transparency.  It should be pretty obvious what we are doing. 
configure is relatively opaque.

The current check works for most people.  The only ones it seems to fail 
are those users that do unusual things.  It is easier to handle one-off 
issues individually as they come up.

   -- Bruce



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list