Re: [Bug-wget] /usr/bin/env: invalid option -- 'S'

[Tim Rühsen]

On 30.05.19 15:56, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 9:50 AM Tim Rühsen <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> On 30.05.19 12:49, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 6:30 AM Tim Rühsen <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Reverted 79be99aff (passes CI). Could you give it try, please ?
>>>
>>> Where can we get that?
>>>
>>> It is not on the mirror (yet?), and https://www.gnu.org/software/wget/
>>> does not list Git or Savannah access.
>>
>> It's on Savannah and Gitlab, branch master,
>> commit b3f86f90cc5b3d3d1c2d6f720818fda9486108ec
> 
> OK, thanks.
> 
> I used PERL5LIB to put teests/ on path for Perl. It looks like at
> least one Debian machine I have is back to the Socket::inet_ntoa
> problems.

Well, using older (Debian) distributions will see that issue. The IPv6
patch has been added to Debian not long ago.

> I'm calling it good.
> 
> The Perl people need to fix Socket::inet_ntoa, and the Debian people
> need to make it available. I'm guessing Debian is the holdup. They
> will leave things broke rather than supplying an update. It is a waste
> of time to file a Debian bug report.

They don't add new functionality to Debian stable, just fixing bugs. And
that IPv6 patch can be considered as 'new feature'. Debian is just not a
rolling release - live with it or change to another distro. All has it's
pros and cons. I live pretty well with Debian unstable (since ~ 2002).
Fix and new features come in pretty fast - except as in times of freeze
(we are currently in (deep ?) freeze).

BTW, the perl people never added the missing IPv6 code. Maybe they
abandoned the module we currently use - and we should use a different
module !?. But I am not into perl on purpose - it's one of the most
stupid programming languages I have ever seen (in short: write once,
read never - hard to maintain). It's simply not 'future save'.

Regards, Tim

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature