in reply to Re^2: Updating distributions with Module::Build, Module::Starter, and PPM::Make
in thread Updating distributions with Module::Build, Module::Starter, and PPM::Make

It's a little complicated; basically, in some ways, M::B is a step backwards, not a step forwards.

Under EU::MM, to determine dependencies, you run Makefile.PL, which is allowed to tailor a list of dependencies specific to that particular installation, then read the dependencies from the "# PREREQ_PM" line in the generated Makefile.

Under M::B, AIUI, dependencies are hardcoded in META.yml (though it does have the nice distinction between requires: and build_requires:).

ActiveState seems to make a real attempt to validate the dependencies by running Makefile.PL in a clean environment, adding any resulting dependencies, then doing the make. But Makefile.PL's built with Module::Build::Compat's small or passthrough options require Module::Build to be installed or installable to work at a point where in the EU::MM universe, dependency information isn't yet available. You can see a passthrough Makefile.PL in action here.

Module::Build::Compat's traditional option will work, but that won't do everything Build.PL can, so I'm not sure I see the point in not just staying with EU::MM (especially for existing modules).

An additional note: even if META.yml were checked before running Makefile.PL, in the examples I've seen, Module::Build isn't listed as a dependency there even though it is required for the build.

  • Comment on Re^3: Updating distributions with Module::Build, Module::Starter, and PPM::Make

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Updating distributions with Module::Build, Module::Starter, and PPM::Make
by adrianh (Chancellor) on Aug 27, 2004 at 09:39 UTC
    Under M::B, AIUI, dependencies are hardcoded in META.yml

    This is incorrect.

    M::B describes dependencies in its Build.PL just like EU::MM describes its dependences in Makefile.PL. The META.yml is generated from this description (as, indeed, it is with the latest EU::MM).

    An additional note: even if META.yml were checked before running Makefile.PL, in the examples I've seen, Module::Build isn't listed as a dependency there even though it is required for the build.

    Just as EU::MM isn't included in the META.yml files that EU::MM generates.

[reply]

      With the small difference that EU::MM is in the Perl core and thus can be expected to be available, whereas Module::Build isn't. There remains the issue of version incompatibilities between different EU::MM versions of course, but seemingly that issue is not as apparent.

[reply]
        With the small difference that EU::MM is in the Perl core and thus can be expected to be available, whereas Module::Build isn't.

        True. However I think I'd argue that neither should be in the dependencies unless the META.yml has "dynamic_config" set to indicate that we need to run a configuration file to install the module.

[reply]
      Thanks for correcting me. I saw the build action didn't regenerate META.yml, so assumed incorrectly that a way for Build.PL to indicate requirements to an external tool. I see now that the distmeta action does this (the "dist" prefix had made me think it was something that should only be done as part of preparing a distribution), or you can do what CPANPLUS does after running the build action: 
      my $build = Module::Build->resume(
    properties => {
        config_dir      => File::Spec->catdir($args->{'dir'}, "_build"
+),
        build_script    => 'Build',
    }
);

my $failures = $build->prereq_failures;

      [download]
[reply]
[d/l]
Re^4: Updating distributions with Module::Build, Module::Starter, and PPM::Make
by jacques (Priest) on Aug 26, 2004 at 20:30 UTC
    Am I misguided to want to include a Build.PL for people using M::B instead of make to install modules?

    I know that most people still use make but I thought it would be nice to also include a Build.PL in the distribution.

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom