On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 02:19:54PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 01:03:31PM -0600, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > The problem of unpacking, or in other words, installing, or in other
> > words, embedded hardwired paths is hard. Think library paths: both
> > pure Perl libraries *and* shared libraries. In theory this is easy:
> > the portable (and grody) solutions is to have a "long enough" filler
> > path(s) that is(are) then at install time binary patched. In
> > practice, though, for some reason no one seems to have done this so
> > that this would be a widely used practice and well-known art.
>
> Looked at the ActiveState Unix installer lately? They distribute a
*rant warning*
Sigh. (Note to self: always remember to spell out everything in full
because someone will feel obliged to informe you.) Yes, I know this.
That's what I referred to by "widely used". ActiveState may be
big, especially in the Windows arena but they are not "widely used".
zip is widely used. .tgz is widely used. Windows is widely used.
UNIX is widely used. ActiveState, not.
*end of rant*
> Perl binary with a built-in @INC prefix something like
> "/tmp/XXXXXXXXXpErLXXXXXX" and then do some s/// madness over the
> binary.
>
> Anyhow, this is easily solved by having pun run the scripts inside the
> par as "perl -Ilib" or something similar.
It's "easily done" but strangely the implementations seems to have
left the main Perl distribution unscathed after all these years.
> Shared libraries are easy enough to solve, build perl staticly linked.
Oh, great.
> You have to do that anyway to solve the "what version of glibc are you
> using" problem (and others).
*minirant*
The world is not not glibc. The world is not Linux.
*end of minirant*
Either I am being even more grumpier than usual or you people
are making even less sense than usual :-)
--
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
