NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
:-)
--Larry Wall in <1991May31.181659.28817@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov>
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Actually... (Score:1)
Every single Fail report on v0.1.4 is due to "No 'Makefile.PL' found - attempting to generate one".
Actually, every fail report is due to:
[ERROR] [Mon Jul 16 19:12:23 2007] This module requires 'Module::Build' and 'CPANPLUS::Dist::Build' to be installed, but you don't have it! Will fall back to 'CPANPLUS::Dist::MM', but might not be able to install!The clue is in the
[ERROR]tag...I would prefer to *not* include Makefile.PL at all because there is another configuration scheme which says "prefer Makefile.PL over Build.PL?" (And of course it defaults to the wrong answer.)
You will keep running into issues like these until either all machines have Module::Build support, or the
config_requires:extension to META.yml is accepted, implemented and supported in all deployed versions of CPANThat should be NA, right? (Score:1)
When CPANPLUS says:
and then
it is trying to be helpful. But the smoker module (be it CPAN::YACSmoke, CPAN::Reporter or whatever) should recognize this case as NA and not FAIL. Would it be hard to tell this case apart?
On another note, Bundle:
Re: (Score:1)
Isn't that more courtesy towards the user than some old ritual one has to follow? I'm constantly amazed by such ideas as Module::Build::Convert [cpan.org], which tries to automate a process for which there is absolutely no need - if it works with a Makefile.PL why move to Build.PL at all.
Re:That should be NA, right? (Score:1)
That depends on whether you consider EU::MM fundamentally broken or not.
Reply to This
Parent