Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Ah, thanks. Not sure we need to make an explicit test for Opcode; we've
>> not heard of anyone not having that.
> In Debian stable, Opcode is in package libperl5.24. This probably
> explains why nobody runs into trouble with it, since libperl is already
> checked by configure for other reasons. Not sure about the RH world.
[ pokes around ] Opcode is in the base perl package on RHEL6;
on Fedora 28, it's in perl-interpreter. Either way, it's in the same
package as /usr/bin/perl, so ain't nobody not gonna have it.
> As for the others Dagfinn mentioned, most seem to be in perl-base, and a
> few in perl-modules-5.24, which is depended upon by libperl5.24, so I
> think the proposed set is good enough for now.
Sounds good. We can always tweak the list some more if the situation
changes, or if we hear from someone using a different distro that slices
things up yet differently. But I don't feel a need to expend configure
cycles on purely hypothetical configurations. I imagine that most
off-the-beaten-track cases would involve hand-built Perl installations,
and those will almost certainly have all of "Perl core". So I think
as long as we cover what the major Linux distros are doing, that's
probably good enough.
regards, tom lane
