[Pdx-pm] [csieh at fnal.gov: Re: Horribly Broken RHEL5/SL5 Perl]

Greg Petras gpetme at gmail.com
Tue Aug 26 14:41:18 PDT 2008

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 1:52 PM, J. Shirley <jshirley at gmail.com> wrote:
> And then when you want to run or change your perl for your application
> in a controlled manner, you modify your paths in every script? If you
> happen to miss one, you run an inconsistent environment?

This is what QA and controlled builds are for, no? I guess it could be
argued either way - either put the path to the perl interpreter in
your build scripts or put the profile settings in the build scripts.
Is env "how it's done"? I'm relatively new to Perl (last 5 years), so
it'd be nice to hear from some others on how they do things.

> If you're not managing your paths in your application and production
> environments, you can't claim that you are being "more secure". You're
> simply being vague and hoping for the best.

Being explicit with a #!/path/to/perl is not vague, in my opinion.


More information about the Pdx-pm-list mailing list