Re: Can I write a transparent shell wrapper to start the correct build of Perl?

Not sure I entirely understand your specific requirements, but why not create a symlink in the local filesystem (I'm assuming there is a local filesystem...) which points to the respective NFS location, e.g.

ln -s /nfs/perl/5.10/centos5/bin/perl /usr/local/bin/perl
[download]

for a centos5 machine. This is a one-time administration thing, and your shebang line in the Perl script would then simply be #!/usr/local/bin/perl.

Comment on Re: Can I write a transparent shell wrapper to start the correct build of Perl? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Can I write a transparent shell wrapper to start the correct build of Perl? by Anonymous Monk on Feb 06, 2008 at 10:04 UTC
Symlinks don't work on the shebang line, IME.	[reply]
Re^3: Can I write a transparent shell wrapper to start the correct build of Perl? by almut (Canon) on Feb 06, 2008 at 13:22 UTC
Why not, what's the problem? I've been using them like this for ages without any issues I could remember. Resolution of symlinks is a rather low-level kernel feature, which should be handled transparently by any modern version of Unix. PS: anyone interested in how it's done in Linux may want to study the function `load_script` in `linux/fs/binfmt_script.c`, which calls `open_exec` (`linux/fs/exec.c`), which in turn eventually branches (via `path_lookup_open`) into the generic path lookup and symlink resolution code implemented in `linux/fs/namei.c`.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Can I write a transparent shell wrapper to start the correct build of Perl? by Anonymous Monk on Feb 06, 2008 at 17:12 UTC
I tried this a few weeks ago on my Debian box and it didn’t work — refused to run perl and gave an error message instead. But I’ve just tried it again and it works now. I am at a loss to explain why.	[reply]