James E Keenan wrote: >That's what puzzling to me: The fact that cpanm (or perhaps 'make' >underneath cpanm) is missing the kit in its entirety.
How does it know which files are missing? It must have at least access to the MANIFEST. The preceding cpanm trace shows that it read META.json, and since the manifest check comes from Makefile.PL obviously it managed to run that too. So those files are definitely actually present. The test phase also refers to actual files in the t/ subdirectory, so those are present too. Most likely all the files are actually present. Interestingly, the MANIFEST check isn't failing to find *all* files. Files listed in the MANIFEST that it doesn't complain about are CONTRIBUTING, Changes, INSTALL, LICENCE, MANIFEST, META.json, META.yml, Makefile.PL, README, and dist.ini. The difference, apparently, is that it finds all the files in the top-level directory, but can't find any files in subdirectories. When it comes to the test phase, things get weirder. The test harness can find the test scripts in the t/ subdirectory, but perl can't find the module which should have been installed into blib/lib. My guess is that the module has actually not been installed into blib/lib, with the build step being broken by the same thing that broke the MANIFEST check. >Do you know what could have caused this? I'm mystified as to how that could happen. Need to poke around an example of it to debug further. -zefram
