[CentOS] PERL module woes

Thu Jun 1 22:44:52 UTC 2006
Jim Perrin <jperrin at gmail.com>

On 6/1/06, Kurt Hansen <khansen at charityweb.net> wrote:
>
> Jim Perrin wrote:
>
> >> In fact, the quality of the perl-related rpms from Red Hat is
> >> the main reason I'm not using RHEL and using CentOS

> Is this the kind of rhetoric that is acceptable on this list? There is
> no value to your comment except to insult.

Actually, I was questioning the validity of that statement since RHEL
and centos are built from identical sources. Theoretically you should
have the same problem with CentOS that you do with RHEL. If something
is different, I'm sure the other admins would be interested in hearing
about it as well, since we are trying to be as compatible with RHEL as
possible. Forgive me for trying to work a little humor (at your
expense) into the day.

As others have pointed out mod_perl has been kindly supplied via a 3rd
party repository, and I  do agree that in very rare instances cpan is
useful. However, for rpmbased distributions, as much software as
humanly possible should be installed via rpm. This allows for easier
administration, software auditing, replication and portability of
packages, and in the event of failure.... blame, since the packages
tell you who built them and when.

As others in this thread pointed out, CPAN is a moving target and
poses a level of risk as such. Packages installed via rpm (while maybe
not perfect) do not suffer from this affliction, are portable,
predictable, and can be identically duplicated across as many machines
as needed, even months down the road. The entire original meaning of
my post was to be careful, and only use cpan as a last resort on rpm
based systems. That point stands.



-- 
This message has been double ROT13 encoded for security. Anyone other
than the intended recipient attempting to decode this message will be
in violation of the DMCA