Re: NWS (was Re: Technical Meeting - 19th April)

2001-04-17 Thread Mark Fowler 

On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Struan Donald wrote:
 * at 17/04 14:00 +0200 Philip Newton said:
  Mark Fowler wrote:
3) Write a set of scripts that are all basically the same but have
   different #!/usr/bin/perl lines on the top and tell you the
  with a bunch of different extensions such as .pl .plx .cgi for
  combinations of "operating system" + web server that map scripts to
  interpreters by extension and/or directory rather than by shebang line...
 surely there should be a better way than this? after all the
 combinations involved are quite numerous. is the notion of something
 that does :
 
 #!/bin/sh
 
 if [ -e /usr/bin/perl ]; then
 exec './bin_perl.pl'
 fi
 
 or equivalent too silly? although not sure this sort of thing is possible
 on non unix type systems. OTOH would at least cut down the number of
 files that the person installing needs to worry about.

I don't particularly see the number of scripts this person is installing
as a problem.  The key concept is that these scripts are designed so that
someone who knows *nothing* about their system can basically upload them
all then see which one works.  Once they've got this script working the
script should contain instructions on how to modify any of the
other scripts to work with their server.

I don't think what you're suggesting will work at all on windows.  Or pure
mod_perl...

Feel free to disagree, I'm just suggesting ideas here.  Honestly, I'm not
sure what's the best way...

Later.

Mark.

-- 
print "\n",map{my$a="\n"if(length$_6);' 'x(36-length($_)/2)."$_\n$a"} (
   Name  = 'Mark Fowler',Title = 'Technology Developer'  ,
   Firm  = 'Profero Ltd',Web   = 'http://www.profero.com/'   ,
   Email = '[EMAIL PROTECTED]',   Phone = '+44 (0) 20 7700 9960'  )

Re: NWS (was Re: Technical Meeting - 19th April)

2001-04-17 Thread Struan Donald 

* at 17/04 14:09 +0100 Mark Fowler said:
 On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Struan Donald wrote:
  surely there should be a better way than this? after all the
  combinations involved are quite numerous. is the notion of something
  that does :
  
  #!/bin/sh
  
  if [ -e /usr/bin/perl ]; then
  exec './bin_perl.pl'
  fi
  
  or equivalent too silly? although not sure this sort of thing is possible
  on non unix type systems. OTOH would at least cut down the number of
  files that the person installing needs to worry about.
 
 I don't particularly see the number of scripts this person is installing
 as a problem.  The key concept is that these scripts are designed so that
 someone who knows *nothing* about their system can basically upload them
 all then see which one works.  Once they've got this script working the
 script should contain instructions on how to modify any of the
 other scripts to work with their server.

it's not so much the number of scripts as the "try each of these
scripts till one works" situation i think we should be trying to
minimise. 
 
 I don't think what you're suggesting will work at all on windows.  Or pure
 mod_perl...

true. although the number of people using mod_perl who'll be using
these is debatable. windows is a problem though.

 Feel free to disagree, I'm just suggesting ideas here.  Honestly, I'm not
 sure what's the best way...

heck, anything that helps is better than the "your isp will know"
school of help.

struan

Re: NWS (was Re: Technical Meeting - 19th April)

2001-04-11 Thread jo walsh 


  4) Install Apache::Template, Bundle-XML, Template Toolkit 2.02 on penderel
 I think this has already been mostly done, but I could be wrong.

after much grappling with CPAN shell trying to upgrade us to 5.6.1,
this is all done now, though a couple of newer versions of XML modules -
not the crucial ones - failed tests, i didn't want to force. let me know
if there's anything you want or need missing,

jo