Perl upgrade

[Matthew Seaman]

Jos Chrispijn wrote:
> Lars Eighner wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 May 2009, Jos Chrispijn wrote:

>> The process described in UPDATING for upgrading to Perl 5.10 is 
>> relatively
>> painless compared to previous perl upgrades.  So much stuff depends upon
>> perl that:

> Do you recommend having Perl updated or should I stay with 5.8?

I've updated a number of machines to perl-5.10, and apart from the sheer
amount of stuff that needs re-installing it has been virtually painless.

Most publicly available perl modules are written to be compatible with
perl-5.8.3 or later and unless you're being bitten by some version specific
bug there's no really pressing reason to upgrade to 5.10 right now.  On
the other hand, neither is there any really pressing reason /not/ to upgrade.
It's all down to personal preference.

However, I expect the consensus on the minimum supported version to change
over time and more use to be made of 5.10 specific features, so I'd certainly
recommend installing brand new machines with perl-5.10 in order to minimize
the potential for future pain.

	Cheers,

	Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.                   7 Priory Courtyard
                                                  Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey     Ramsgate
                                                  Kent, CT11 9PW

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 259 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20090509/99f4be08/signature.pgp