I believe that the problem arises on ActivePerl's side, as both PPM::Make and Module::Build appear to use the module name as the title in these cases, instead of the path to the local file. You can see this by doing
and noticing the nmake step generates already the html files. Amongst other things, this will insert ActivePerl-specific stuff like links to JavaScript scripts used in the local ActivePerl html docs, but will also have the problem with the path to the local file being used as the title. If you then run PPM::Make's make_ppm on this, the script will see a blib/html directory present, and will not regenerate the html docs.perl Makefile.PL nmake
If you want to not use the html docs generated by ActivePerl, using PPM::Make, you can do
which will generate the html files using PPM::Make and leads to, for example, a title of Perl::Critic::Policy::BuiltinFunctions::ProhibitLvalueSubstr, rather than the path to the local file that results using ActivePerl's html generation. If you're using Module-Build, this problem can be avoided by usingperl Makefile.PL nmake deltree blib\html make_ppm
directly, instead of some Makefile.PL compatibility mode, as this will use Module::Build directly to generate the html docs. However, not using ActivePerl's generated docs will lose the JavaScript functionality that ActivePerl provides.perl Build.PL perl Build
Unfortunately, after all this, even if you fix these problems before you make up the ppm package, if you're installing this on a recent ActivePerl, the ppm utility won't install the docs present under blib/html, but instead will generate the html docs directly from the module files. This results in these cases in the path to the local file being used in the title.
It's probably worth filing a bug report with ActiveState about this.
In reply to Re: Question about creating PPM's...
by randyk
in thread Question about creating PPM's...
by CSJewell
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |