Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> writes: > Norbert Preining <norb...@preining.info> writes:
>> If a user/system admin wants to replace Perl by prepending the path to >> a self compiled Perl to the PATH, it is his right to do so, and Perl >> scripts are expected to follow this decision. It is the obligation of >> the one doing the change to ensure proper availability of modules and >> support files. > There were literally zero packages in Debian that did this that Lintian > could find. Did we miss something? Oh, hm, now that same Lintian tag is reporting a bunch of packages that were using /usr/bin/env, which makes me think we *did* miss something. The intent of this change wasn't to declare a bunch of packages buggy, so yeah, that's something we should look at. (That said, this did already violate a should in Policy, and I think it's questionable how much having some random selection of Perl scripts honor the PATH when all the others don't really would be to anyone.) https://lintian.debian.org/tags/wrong-path-for-interpreter.html Did Lintian have some special case that was allowing /usr/bin/env perl previously and then Lintian changed based on Policy? That would be unfortunate, since we thought we were changing to match Lintian.... -- Russ Allbery (ea...@eyrie.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
