Fowarding this accepted patch on from p5p.

----- Forwarded message from Tony Bowden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----

Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
list-help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
list-post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Tony Bowden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PATCH: ExtUtils::MakeMaker
Mail-Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Rating: onion.valueclick.com 1.6.2 0/1000/N


Currently, when doing a 'perl Makefile.PM' MakeMaker will complain when you
don't have a pre-requisite. If you're running an older version of a 
prereq than it wants, it will also tell you of this, but in a less informative
way. Here's a patch to change the error from 'prerequisite Foo::Bar 1.19 not found'
to 'prerequisite Foo::Bar 1.19 not found. We have 1.18'

Tony

--- lib/ExtUtils/MakeMaker.pm.11710     Sat Sep  1 10:28:22 2001
+++ lib/ExtUtils/MakeMaker.pm   Sat Sep  1 10:32:26 2001
@@ -348,7 +348,8 @@
            warn "Warning: prerequisite $prereq failed to load: $@";
        }
        elsif ($prereq->VERSION < $self->{PREREQ_PM}->{$prereq} ){
-           warn "Warning: prerequisite $prereq $self->{PREREQ_PM}->{$prereq} not 
found";
+           warn "Warning: prerequisite $prereq $self->{PREREQ_PM}->{$prereq} not 
+found. We have "
+               . ($prereq->VERSION || 'unknown version');
 # Why is/was this 'delete' here?  We need PREREQ_PM later to make PPDs.
 #      } else {
 #          delete $self->{PREREQ_PM}{$prereq};

Tony
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Tony Bowden | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.tmtm.com/
                     If I'm feigning coherence and calmness  Laugh with me
--------------------------------------------------------------------------



----- End forwarded message -----

-- 

Michael G. Schwern   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>    http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/
Perl6 Quality Assurance     <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>       Kwalitee Is Job One
Carpe canem!  Seize the dog!  This cannot be right.
        -- The Critic

Reply via email to