in reply to Re^2: Newbie needs help installing DateTime packages
in thread Newbie needs help installing DateTime packages

So, we go through all the trouble to have separate core, vendor and site_lib directories, but vendors like Ubuntu still manage to screw things up?

If you had read the comment, you would realize that it is not a matter of "screwing things up". Instead, it is an acknowledgement that the operating system uses perl for a lot of administrative work.

In that vein, it is useful for the system perl environment to be relatively static (including expected versions) while the development environment can be more fluid.

On my system (FC12), the "system" perl is v10.0.0. The "development" perl is v10.0.1. You will find that if you update perl via CPAN or CPANPLUS that some of the desired updates are actually dependent on v10.0.1. I do not want to compromise the system operation (or do exhaustive tests) simply to save ~250M by not having a separate, custom version of perl.

Hope this helps.
  • Comment on Re^3: Newbie needs help installing DateTime packages

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Newbie needs help installing DateTime packages
by JavaFan (Canon) on Apr 09, 2010 at 14:48 UTC
    Eh, the OP wants to install a module. He doesn't want to upgrade or modify his perl. It shouldn't be necessary to upgrade or modify perl past 5.10 to install the module the OP needs.

    So what the OS uses perl for a lot of administrative work? Even if it is doing it inbold face? It doesn't matter. It's irrelevant for what the OP needs. There's no need to spread FUD.

    You will find that if you update perl via CPAN or CPANPLUS that some of the desired updates are actually dependent on v10.0.1.
    Yes. How's that relevant to installing a module? Why not respond to a question how to install a module with "be careful when upgrading your libc"? After all, libc is used by a lot of tools as well.
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom