On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, imacat wrote: > On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:47:31 -0500 (CDT) > Randy Kobes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It seems to me that this issue should be decided at the > > level of the Perl core, since this is responsible for > > writing the glue for XS-based modules. If it was decided > > that certain %Config entries should not be trusted, then it > > would be more efficient to handle this at the core level, > > rather than having every module author put in the same > > checks. > > http://search.cpan.org/dist/perl/configpm > The Config module contains all the information that was available to the > Configure program at Perl *****build time***** (over 900 values). > > This is not a kind of question that worths answering.
I'm not sure how to interpret this last comment. All I was suggesting was that this issue has implications beyond CPANPLUS; for example, many places in ExtUtils::* seems to assume %Config has valid entries. Ken Williams' ExtUtils::CBuilder (which is due to be integrated into the perl core) seems to think that this question is worth answering; the have_compiler() method there tests if a working C compiler and linker is available, by actually compiling and testing a sample C library. -- best regards, randy
