ANNOUNCE: 4.00.0a9 released

[Jim Levie]

On Sat, 2002-10-05 at 21:41, Nick Phillips wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 03:06:36AM +0100, Julian Field wrote:
>
> > distro-independent RPM). And all to keep the nice guys at RedHat happy...
>
> To be fair, I would expect problems due to the fact that Perl 5.8
> incorporates so many extra modules into the "core" functionality.
>
> Is it not more "perl5.6 rpm" and "perl5.8 rpm" rather than "RH8" and "the
> rest"?

That's what I'd think the real dependency is, not so much a RedHat 8 vs
earlier versions. While RPM's are fine for a lot of things, this might
be a case where they aren't entirely suitable, unless you want to
maintain 2 or more variants for RedHat and who knows how many others for
the various other Linux variants. Done properly, a "configure script"
could make installation as easy as an RPM installation and would allow a
single distribution package for all platforms and Perl versions. The
only disadvantage that I can see to that is not being able to query a
package database to determine what version of MailScanner is installed.
However, that can be solved by always making /path-to/MailScanner be a
symlink to /path-to/MailScanner-d.dd.d, where d.dd.d is the version.
That allows the "configure script" to determine if an install or upgrade
is being done and to act accordingly.

While that probably sounds like heresy to staunch RPM advocates, to me
it's just a matter of using the most appropriate tool for the task at
hand.
--
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
The instructions said to use Windows 98 or better, so I installed RedHat
   Jim Levie                                 email:
jim at entrophy-free.net