On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Peter Rabbitson <ribasu...@cpan.org> wrote:
> I didn't phrase my question correctly. What I am after is: > > Imagine you get a random checkout of some dist and/or extract a tarball. > Aside from running `perl Makefile.PL` and visually checking what is > missing, there is nothing semi-standard that will answer "what do I feed to > | cpanm, so that prove -l will work". > > Hope this makes more sense. > The first complication there is that our dependency resolution is inherently a two-phase process due to configure-requires. The second complication is that systems like dzil make it a three stage process (and possibly so do other systems). I agree a better way to deal with this would be nice, but I don't expect it to look like you want it to look. Leon
