ric00015 has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

I am exploring options on how to create a document from Perl. Some of the options were to create a Word document (but I hear that sucks, partially because there is no real standard for their formats); RTF (as an alternative for the .doc); or LaTex to create a PDF. I happened to come across PDF::Create on CPAN (to see if I can bypass latex), but it won't even install. I am coming here to see if this is a bug, or if I'm just doing something wrong.

I am using Perl 5.16.0, on Red Hat 5.6. The complete error output is as follows:

Writing /home/fg4y8n/.cpan/Metadata
Running install for module 'PDF::Create'
Running make for M/MA/MARKUSB/PDF-Create-1.06.tar.gz
Checksum for /home/fg4y8n/.cpan/sources/authors/id/M/MA/MARKUSB/PDF-Cr
+eate-1.06.tar.gz ok
Scanning cache /home/fg4y8n/.cpan/build for sizes
......................................................................
+......DONE

  CPAN.pm: Building M/MA/MARKUSB/PDF-Create-1.06.tar.gz

Created MYMETA.yml and MYMETA.json
Creating new 'Build' script for 'PDF-Create' version '1.06'
Building PDF-Create
  MARKUSB/PDF-Create-1.06.tar.gz
  ./Build -- OK
Running Build test
t/01-basic.t .......... ok
t/02-string.t ......... ok
t/03-image.t .......... ok
t/04-drawing.t ........ ok
t/05-outline.t ........ ok
t/06-annotation.t ..... ok
t/07-fonts.t .......... ok
t/09-cgi.t ............ Can't locate object method "catfile" via packa
+ge "File::Spec" (perhaps you forgot to load "File::Spec"?) at t/09-cg
+i.t line 19.
# Looks like your test exited with 255 before it could output anything
+.
t/09-cgi.t ............ Dubious, test returned 255 (wstat 65280, 0xff0
+0)
Failed 2/2 subtests
t/99-wifi-parabola.t .. ok

Test Summary Report
-------------------
t/09-cgi.t          (Wstat: 65280 Tests: 0 Failed: 0)
  Non-zero exit status: 255
  Parse errors: Bad plan.  You planned 2 tests but ran 0.
Files=9, Tests=119,  1 wallclock secs ( 0.06 usr  0.02 sys +  0.50 cus
+r  0.09 csys =  0.67 CPU)
Result: FAIL
Failed 1/9 test programs. 0/119 subtests failed.
  MARKUSB/PDF-Create-1.06.tar.gz
  ./Build test -- NOT OK
//hint// to see the cpan-testers results for installing this module, t
+ry:
  reports MARKUSB/PDF-Create-1.06.tar.gz
Running Build install
  make test had returned bad status, won't install without force
Failed during this command:
 MARKUSB/PDF-Create-1.06.tar.gz               : make_test NO

[download]

File::Spec is installed and is up to date, so I’m not sure where that’s coming from.

P.S. Any advice on creating a document would be appreciated as well.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: PDF::Create fails on install
by monkey_boy (Priest) on Nov 26, 2013 at 23:29 UTC

    The part of that test code below: 
    use strict;
use File::Basename;
use PDF::Create;
use Test::More tests => 2;
use Config;

my $pdfname = $0;
$pdfname =~ s/\.t/\.pdf/;
my $cginame = File::Spec->catfile(dirname($0) . "/09-cgi-script.pl");

    [download]

    It doesnt use File::Spec, so i dont think that test could ever pass, seems like a bug of the author & as the others pass you could safely force the install.


    This is not a Signature...
[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
      Presumably it used to work because one of the other modules being pulled in used File::Spec, but the current version of whatever that module was doesn't. This is why you should always declare *all* your pre-requisites in Makefile.PL, even those that you know are pulled in by other pre-reqs, and you should always 'use' *all* the modules you refer to.
[reply]

        This is why you should always declare *all* your pre-requisites in Makefile.PL, even those that you know are pulled in by other pre-reqs, and you should always 'use' *all* the modules you refer to.

        Can I assume that you do not mean that you should also list those packages that you do not directly use?

        For example, let's assume that I use the Foo::Bar package, and Foo::Bar uses Biz::Bang and Biz::Biff under the hood. I also make a call to Biz::Biff::frobnitz() from within my code. I am assuming that you are saying:

        • I should do a use Biz::Biff.
        • I should list Foo::Bar and Biz::Biff as prerequisites.
        I am also assuming that you are not saying that I should list Biz::Bang as a prerequisite, as that is an implementation detail of Foo::Bar, and unrelated to my own code.

        I just want to clarify my understanding, since my parser is coming up with two different meanings of your statement. If this is the correct reading of your statement, I agree 100%. As a clarification, I would probably s/your pre-requisites/your direct pre-requisites/.

        --MidLifeXis

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

      Ah, thanks. I'll just ignore the error, force install the module and report it as a bug.

[reply]

Back to Seekers of Perl Wisdom