Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Mostly due to your posting and subsequent investigation, I installed Gentoo on one of my machines at work yesterday. It looks very promising, although the move from RPMs is made a little more difficult by the lack of instant gratification. But I can accept that since most of the items that take a while to upgrade don't get upgraded very often.

    Also, I think interactive Makefile.PL routines are only necessary when you need the user to specify some information for testing: a DSN, username and password for a

    • The lack of instant gratification becomes less of a problem the longer you use Gentoo. You gain so much from the process that the drawbacks are small by comparison

      I have never been a fan of RPMs, I usually installed a barebones redhat and compiled my own apache, etc.

      The real key to Gentoo, for me, came when 1.2 was released. I had installed 1.1a. I immediately thought "Whoops, need to upgrade", until people on the gentoo forums pointed out the folly in that assumption. Like the BSDs, you upgrade gentoo

      • One thing that scares me is how do you stick to a stable tested version? That doesn't seem to be something gentoo offers, as it's by end users rather than a company (and doesn't have the rigorous testing debian has). Companies like ours need that kind of long-term stability with just security updates.
        • You'll be happy to know that Gentoo doesn't have a concept of "stable" as such  ;-) Until they have this, I won't be running it on any servers, but I'm quite happy running it on laptops and desktops. Of course, you don't *have* to upgrade to the latest and greatest if you prefer stability, you'll just be slightly out of date.

          [Of course, the CPAN doesn't have this concept either  ;-)]
          • Actually that's not quite true, though because CPAN's an anarchy it's very hit and miss. You can upload something with an underscore in the version to make it an unstable version.
            • You have to admit CPAN has no quality control or a list of modules that others consider to be stable. And while we're at it, where's the digital signatures...  ;-)
              • Yes, I totally agree. There's a *definition* of stable. It's just that you're free to upload modules that aren't without calling them unstable  ;-)

                Hmm, digital signatures. I don't even know how that would work. I mean, which party would you trust - the uploader or the CPAN maintainers?
                • Hmm, digital signatures. I don't even know how that would work. I mean, which party would you trust - the uploader or the CPAN maintainers?

                  I think that's the wrong question to be asking.

                  CPAN with digital signatures would be a better place, whether you trust whoever is designated as the module maintainer, the CPAN maintainers, or not.

                  For example, it's rather easy to imagine a web of trust built up out of the whole CPAN community. I might know you, Schwern, or acme personally and trust your concept