Re^2: Module::Build users -- please use the "traditional" create_makefile

I think the cause is that PREFIX is too hard. At least that's the claim I've heard from the Module::Build developers. I also heard that Schwern promised to implement PREFIX= in Module::Build, as that feature was auctioned at some YAPC, 6 months to one year ago. The feature is still missing, obviously.

Personally, I've used Module::Build once, because it seemed easier at that time to not muck around with the Makefile text, as I wanted to add (re)building a Parse::YAPP parser from a grammar to the make process. Other than that, I mostly see people using Module::Build because Schwern tells them to or other people suggest that Module::Build was somehow "better" than ExtUtils::MakeMaker, where I found it opaque to debug and non-working resp. with less features (but then, I've ranted on this often enough).

Comment on Re^2: Module::Build users -- please use the "traditional" create_makefile_pl option

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Module::Build users -- please use the "traditional" create_makefile_pl option by brian_d_foy (Abbot) on May 18, 2005 at 17:24 UTC
I really don't buy the "too hard" argument. They've either painted themselves into a corner or just not tried hard enough. Most good installers have a way to specify a root directory, and MakeMaker certainly does. It's a basic feature of an installer program. Does anyone want to (anonymously) tell the truth? Was that a big design mistake that no one wants to fix? -- brian d foy <brian@stonehenge.com>	[reply]
Re^4: Module::Build users -- please use the "traditional" create_makefile_pl option by kwilliams (Sexton) on May 29, 2005 at 02:11 UTC
I'm not a regular viewer of perlmonks, but I was pointed to this thread, so I'll answer. There are several reasons we don't have PREFIX support right now. The first thing to look at is right in the M::B docs. Second, we do have a way to specify a root directory. In fact, we have two ways: `install_base` and `destdir`. `destdir` is more suitable for rpm/deb/etc. package maintainers, and `install_base` is more suitable for people who want to install to their home directory, or to /usr/local instead of /usr, or whatever. Finally, about the "big design mistake no one wants to fix" suggestion, there's nothing about M::B's design in particular that would prevent us from adding PREFIX support - the only hard part is actually just in writing code that implements PREFIX's byzantine logic, which at this point is only implemented in MakeMaker itself and will take considerable effort to extract. But someone's attempting to do that right now, and Schwern's going over the patch to check for correctness. I don't think I've ever said PREFIX support was too hard, though - it's certainly not harder than other things M::B already has. I've said it doesn't work very well, and it doesn't seem to make much sense to spend a lot of my effort implementing it when other things are waiting. Maybe I actually need to follow perlmonks a little more closely; the amount of FUD about M::B that gets passed around here without people actually checking it is a little disheartening. -Ken	[reply]
Re^5: Module::Build users -- please use the "traditional" create_makefile_pl option by brian_d_foy (Abbot) on May 29, 2005 at 04:01 UTC
The FUD about MakeMaker is just as bad. Your assumption that we haven't read the docs, or that we'd magically agree with you when we did, is similarly disheartening. I'm not sure why you think you have to make Module::Build's PREFIX do the same thing that MakeMaker does: just make it do something that will work for the users if they specify that option. As long as perl can find everything most everyone won't care will things end up. To me, that's the big design mistake no one wants to fix. -- brian d foy <brian@stonehenge.com>	[reply]


The stupid question is the question not asked
	PerlMonks

Re^2: Module::Build users -- please use the "traditional" create_makefile_pl option