Re: When cpanm fails to find any of the files in a kit
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
When cpanm fails to find any of the files in a kit
Today my attention was drawn to this older post on Stack Overflow: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/37009887/cpanm-perl-module-installation-failed-on-make-and-make-test The original poster apparently found a work-around for his problem, but I felt there were still puzzling things about the case. Here's the setup (as best I can tell): 1. User has installed App::cpanminus to work with the system perl. 2. User tries to use cpanm to install a module (in this case, Try::Tiny, but it doesn't really matter which one) from CPAN. It appears that, at least on the user's first pass he/she did not use 'sudo' in any way -- but the actual command-line invocation is not provided. 3. cpanm first sounds warnings at: # Checking if your kit is complete... Warning: the following files are missing in your kit: lib/Try/Tiny.pm maint/bench.pl t/00-report-prereqs.dd ... # The process appears to be failing *all* the files in the kit; this is not a problem of a CPAN author screwing up one or two items in the MANIFEST. That's what puzzling to me: The fact that cpanm (or perhaps 'make' underneath cpanm) is missing the kit in its entirety. Have others encountered this? Do you know what could have caused this? (The poster apparently got a better outcome when using 'sudo' with 'cpanm', but it's not clear to me why that would happen.) Thank you very much. Jim Keenan
