On Feb 14, 2006, at 5:43 AM, demerphq wrote:
On 2/14/06, Adam Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 09:26:06PM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
"chromatic" == chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
chromatic> On Sunday 12 February 2006 18:32, Randal L. Schwartz
wrote:
My prefer_installer is EUMM. And the value of mbuild_install_arg
shouldn't
matter, because it should always be using EUMM, not MB.
chromatic> That's going to be difficult for distributions that only
provide a Build.PL
chromatic> file.
I recognize that, but (a) those distros should not exist, so that's
A couple of months ago I would have agreed. Now I'm not so sure.
If you'd care to take time, I'd be interested in hearing your views
on what level of MB support would be necessary before such distros
should exist.
For me it comes down to one simple structural problem (I consider
things
like PREFIX nigglies that can be fixed).
Module::Build (specifically ONLY dists without a Makefile.PL) simply
doesn't bootstrap.
I think I'm coming into this discussion late. =( What do you mean by
"doesn't bootstrap"? M::B does indeed use itself to install itself, so
you must have something else in mind. Could you elaborate briefly to
bring me up to date on this discussion?
At the very least the Makefile.pl could create a tiny makefile that
then runs Build.pl and Build as needed. If someone can explain why
this is impossible, then id like to hear it.
We already do that, using the 'passthrough' or 'small' options for
auto-creating a Makefile.PL. See the docs for Module::Build::Compat.
Module::Build itself also ships with such a Makefile.PL so that
automated tools like CPAN(PLUS) can install it.
-Ken
