Fri Jun 13 20:57:33 2014: Request 95809 was acted upon.
Transaction: Correspondence added by SISYPHUS
Queue: Inline
Subject: [PATCH] Using Inline in a distribution with multiple modules
Broken in: (no value)
Severity: (no value)
Owner: Nobody
Requestors: [email protected]
Status: open
Ticket <URL: https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=95809 >
On Fri Jun 13 15:17:55 2014, [email protected] wrote:
I've included your fix to
> checking the $mm->{PMLIBDIRS} array and attached my version.
I'd like to have a look at it but the attachment seems to have gone astray ;-)
> Neither (I believe) fix the issue of having something like Foo 'use'ing
> other modules that use Inline and then them being compiled multiple
> times.
Yes, some duplication of compilation still occurs - but, UIM, at least that now
happens only for the first time that 'make' is run. Subsequent running of make
commands (eg 'make test', 'make install') no longer execute the
\$(PERL) -Mblib -MInline=NOISY,_INSTALL_ -M$name -e1 $version \$(INST_ARCHLIB)
command because the target now exists.
Still - I'm surprised that the duplication of the same compilation occurs (as I
expected Inline to detect that such was unnecessary).
> But after looking a bit I believe that one is going to be a
> challenge (at least for me!) to figure out... I'll have to dig into
> Inline some more.
Presently, it's not clear to me either just what is entailed in fixing that up.
But it doesn't really bother me, and I'm prepared to leave it alone until
either someone complains or I have time to look into it properly.
As far as I'm concerned it's right to go - and it's now just a question of
which of the two MakeMaker.pm files we use.
Cheers,
Rob
