Re: Re^4: Module::Build article on perl.com, MakeMaker is doomed

I have spent a couple of hours patching the source of Module::Build and can now get it to install (almost) properly with nmake. Patches submitted to the author. This module has a way to go yet and stillhas some very significant issues particularly the failure to recognise an incremented version number and thus the requirement for an update.....

cheers

tachyon

s&&rsenoyhcatreve&&&s&n.+t&"$'$`$\"$\&"&ee&&y&srve&&d&&print

Comment on Re: Re^4: Module::Build article on perl.com, MakeMaker is doomed

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re^4: Module::Build article on perl.com, MakeMaker is doomed by autarch (Hermit) on Feb 16, 2003 at 21:23 UTC
This module has a way to go yet and still has some very significant issues particularly the failure to recognise an incremented version number and thus the requirement for an update..... Absolutely. There's lots of work to be done, and your patches will help, I'm sure. Just because Module::Build isn't perfect doesn't mean it won't succeed. Of course it needs lots of people looking at it on many different platforms. Hopefully my article will help convince more people to take a look at it, which will result in more bug reports and a better tool in the end.	[reply]
Re: Re: Re: Re^4: Module::Build article on perl.com, MakeMaker is doomed by tachyon (Chancellor) on Feb 16, 2003 at 23:05 UTC
If I get the time I will have a better look at it with a view towards fixing it up some more. A h2xs like tool would be a very good idea. As far as I can see it is not writing a .packlist so I don't see how it is going to keep track of installations. Unisntall functionality seems lacking and the failure to reinstall with incremented version numbers is a critical flaw. The concept is sound it is just the implementation that needs some work. cheers tachyon s&&rsenoyhcatreve&&&s&n.+t&"$'$`$\"$\&"&ee&&y&srve&&d&&print	[reply]