On Mar 15, 2007, at 8:54 PM, Adam Kennedy wrote:
Chris Dolan wrote:
M::B does not require make nor a C compiler to install or run,
once you have all of its dependencies installed. That means that
in theory it can be installed on a Mac that lacks the Developer
Tools or on Windows with
Ken Williams wrote:
On Mar 13, 2007, at 8:38 PM, Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni wrote:
Jonathan Rockway wrote:
Why don't y'all just use Module::Install? It handles
build_requires, AND you
can bundle modules with your dist, in case dependencies worry
you. Problems
solved.
OTOH,
Jonathan Rockway writes:
Why don't y'all just use Module::Install?
As has been mentioned before on this list, because it involves bundling
an installer with your module.
So if the installer changes (to fix a bug that affects the ability of
(some) end users to install your module), you have to
Jonathan Rockway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why don't y'all just use Module::Install?
Because it doesn't perform a mere install, as the name suggests. It
builds, meaning it requires (and uses) a build environment -- and
scares away customers that do not want to have a build environment on
Johan Vromans wrote:
Jonathan Rockway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why don't y'all just use Module::Install?
Because it doesn't perform a mere install, as the name suggests. It
builds, meaning it requires (and uses) a build environment -- and
scares away customers that do not want to have a
On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 07:43:38AM -0500, David Golden wrote:
That said, i agree in the meantime that providing a traditional
Makefile.PL along with a Build.PL is usually a wise approach, as Chris
suggested.
But to my knowledge, I can't do that, because I have some
'build_requires' lines. I
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 03:19:09PM -0400, David Golden wrote:
I think if you use M::B and have it create a traditional Makefile.PL,
it will just promote all those build_requires to full prereqs. So
people that have M::B will get the build_requires behavior and those
with only EU::MM will get
On 3/13/07, Paul LeoNerd Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but doesn't that produce end results that depend on too much..?
Locally I build these CPAN dists into real debian packages with
dh-make-perl, which knows how to translate build and runtime
dependencies into their debian equivalents. If
Paul LeoNerd Evans writes:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 03:19:09PM -0400, David Golden wrote:
I think if you use M::B and have it create a traditional Makefile.PL,
it will just promote all those build_requires to full prereqs. So
people that have M::B will get the build_requires behavior and
On Tuesday 13 March 2007 14:23, Paul LeoNerd Evans wrote:
On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 07:43:38AM -0500, David Golden wrote:
That said, i agree in the meantime that providing a traditional
Makefile.PL along with a Build.PL is usually a wise approach, as Chris
suggested.
But to my knowledge, I
On Mar 13, 2007, at 7:41 PM, Jonathan Rockway wrote:
Why don't y'all just use Module::Install? It handles
build_requires, AND you
can bundle modules with your dist, in case dependencies worry you.
Problems
solved.
Regards,
Jonathan Rockway
Because M::I still uses make, thereby failing
Jonathan Rockway wrote:
Why don't y'all just use Module::Install? It handles
build_requires, AND you
can bundle modules with your dist, in case dependencies worry you.
Problems
solved.
OTOH, Module::Install (and Module::Build as well to be honest)
doesn't work on old Perl.
Some
On Mar 13, 2007, at 8:38 PM, Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni wrote:
Jonathan Rockway wrote:
Why don't y'all just use Module::Install? It handles
build_requires, AND you
can bundle modules with your dist, in case dependencies worry
you. Problems
solved.
OTOH, Module::Install (and
* Chris Dolan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-11 06:30]:
create_makefile_pl = 'traditional'
++
Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/
On 3/11/07, Adam Kennedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a known bug (a type of circular dependency) in Module::Build
that they can't fix.
No, that's a different bug. (Though it relates in that it makes
workarounds harder.)
This bug is the result of CPANPLUS trying to be clever and falling
On Mar 11, 2007, at 7:43 AM, David Golden wrote:
That said, i agree in the meantime that providing a traditional
Makefile.PL along with a Build.PL is usually a wise approach, as Chris
suggested.
Just to expand these thoughts, every one of the modules I maintain is
Module::Build-based and
I am getting lots of test reports from machines that don't have
Module::Build installed, and so they all ultimately do something like
this:
[ERROR] [Sun Mar 11 00:31:43 2007] This module requires 'Module::Build'
and 'CPANPLUS::Dist::Build' to be installed, but you don't have it! Will fall
On Mar 10, 2007, at 10:04 PM, David Golden wrote:
On 3/10/07, Paul LeoNerd Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am getting lots of test reports from machines that don't have
Module::Build installed, and so they all ultimately do something like
Is there anything I as the module's author, can do
18 matches
Mail list logo
