Re: Prerequistie for Marpa::HTML
Hi On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 5:32 AM, Jeffrey jeffreykeg...@jeffreykegler.comwrote: As far as I can tell the actual behavior of Module::Build would be more in accord with the following: Modules listed in this section are necessary to build and install the given module. If a listed module is necessary for regular usage as well as the build and install, the listed module also needs to be specified using the 'requires' argument. I see a patch submission rising! (get it? bad moon rising?) Anyway, I suggest submitting a documentation patch! :) S.
Re: Prerequistie for Marpa::HTML
* Jeffrey jeffreykeg...@jeffreykegler.com [2010-03-22 00:50]: @Aristotle: Your two one-syllable answers were very useful. I realised afterwards that the mail reads somewhat gruff rather than (as intended) amused. Sorry. An obstacle for me was that Module::Build's actual behavior seems to contradict the documentation in Module::Build::API, which says of 'build_requires' that Modules listed in this section are necessary to build and install the given module, but are not necessary for regular usage of it. Read literally, that says that any module necessary for regular usage should never be listed under 'build_requires'. As far as I can tell the actual behavior of Module::Build would be more in accord with the following: Modules listed in this section are necessary to build and install the given module. If a listed module is necessary for regular usage as well as the build and install, the listed module also needs to be specified using the 'requires' argument. Right, it’s simply that one of these is for code that runs in normal operation and the other is for the code that runs during installation. If a module is needed at both times, it should be listed in both sections. It’s odd that adding to `build_requires` fixes any problem though. Older CPAN toolchains only understand `requires`, and many modules list all their dependencies there and do not even have a distinct `build_requires` list. To my knowledge those modules work fine. So your problem is a bit of a mystery. Hmm. (Nevertheless, your solution is the correct thing to do, so don’t go reverting it.) Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/
Re: Prerequistie for Marpa::HTML
# from Jeffrey # on Saturday 20 March 2010 20:32: An obstacle for me was that Module::Build's actual behavior seems to contradict the documentation in Module::Build::API, which says of 'build_requires' that Modules listed in this section are necessary to build and install the given module, but are not necessary for regular usage of it. Read literally, that says that any module necessary for regular usage should never be listed under 'build_requires'. Yes, they should be listed as 'requires'. What actually happens is that M::B writes the prerequisites into _build/prereqs (and MYMETA.yml), then prints some warnings about whichever ones are missing. After that, it's up to your cpan client. Modules listed in 'requires' will be present at build time. Modules in 'build_requires' *may* not be present after installation. I'm not aware of any reason why it would be useful to list them in both. Perhaps the meta spec is clearer about this? http://module-build.sourceforge.net/META-spec.html#build_requires We welcome documentation patches in the RT queue. Thanks, Eric -- software: a hypothetical exercise which happens to compile. --- http://scratchcomputing.com ---
Re: Prerequistie for Marpa::HTML
@Aristotle: Your two one-syllable answers were very useful. The bug you spotted in your longer answer was from a previous release. But armed with the knowledge that the voice of experience indicated that the problem almost certainly lay in my packaging, I went back and added the Marpa module to *both* the 'require' and 'build_requires' for Marpa::HTML. Now all seems to work perfectly. An obstacle for me was that Module::Build's actual behavior seems to contradict the documentation in Module::Build::API, which says of 'build_requires' that Modules listed in this section are necessary to build and install the given module, but are not necessary for regular usage of it. Read literally, that says that any module necessary for regular usage should never be listed under 'build_requires'. As far as I can tell the actual behavior of Module::Build would be more in accord with the following: Modules listed in this section are necessary to build and install the given module. If a listed module is necessary for regular usage as well as the build and install, the listed module also needs to be specified using the 'requires' argument. Thanks, jeffrey On Mar 18, 5:23 am, pagalt...@gmx.de (Aristotle Pagaltzis) wrote: * Jeffrey jeffreykeg...@jeffreykegler.com [2010-03-18 13:00]: 1.) Is this to be expected when a new module (first non-developer release) is a prerequisite? No. 2.) Is my set-up still at fault? META.yml, which is created by Module::build has a Marpa: 0.100 line, which I hoped would suffice. Neither your Makefile.PL nor your Build.PL list Marpa as a requirement at all. It’s kinda funny that you go to extra effect to get Module::Build to hack it into the META.yml, by way of `meta_add`, when just listing the prereqs properly would make it do that automatically for you. What made you do that? In any case the result reported by the Testers is entirely to be expected, and is just what users will experience if they try to install your module with any CPAN installer: they’ll be forced to resolve the dependency manually before it will install. 3.) Is this a problem with some of the cpantesters setups. No. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/
Prerequistie for Marpa::HTML
I've got a new module out on CPAN (Marpa::HTML). It requires another new module of mine (Marpa). I'm getting a lot of NA or UNKNOWN cpantesters results for Marpa::HTML because of the absense of the Marpa module at the required version level. Please note I'm talking about the lastest revs here: Marpa-HTML 0.101_000 and Marpa 0.10. I've had similar problems with earlier versions but I've since (at least so I thought) fixed my Module::Build setup. I wonder 1.) Is this to be expected when a new module (first non-developer release) is a prerequisite? 2.) Is my set-up still at fault? META.yml, which is created by Module::build has a Marpa: 0.100 line, which I hoped would suffice. 3.) Is this a problem with some of the cpantesters setups. thanks, jeffrey kegler
Re: Prerequistie for Marpa::HTML
* Jeffrey jeffreykeg...@jeffreykegler.com [2010-03-18 13:00]: 1.) Is this to be expected when a new module (first non-developer release) is a prerequisite? No. 2.) Is my set-up still at fault? META.yml, which is created by Module::build has a Marpa: 0.100 line, which I hoped would suffice. Neither your Makefile.PL nor your Build.PL list Marpa as a requirement at all. It’s kinda funny that you go to extra effect to get Module::Build to hack it into the META.yml, by way of `meta_add`, when just listing the prereqs properly would make it do that automatically for you. What made you do that? In any case the result reported by the Testers is entirely to be expected, and is just what users will experience if they try to install your module with any CPAN installer: they’ll be forced to resolve the dependency manually before it will install. 3.) Is this a problem with some of the cpantesters setups. No. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/
