* Bruno Negrao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-11-13 16:32]:
> Even if I use the technique you suggested, when an automated
> cpan-tester went to install my module, it will fail if it
> didn't have daemontools installed, right?
I'm not sure how CPAN testers would react to that result, but
even if they r
First, I'd like to address people's concern over the format of the META
file. Module users and 99% of module authors have nothing to be concerned
about. Most folks shouldn't even know the thing exists.
Module::Build has been generating and using META.yml since nearly the
beginning. MakeMaker
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 04:11:45PM +, Sam Vilain wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 02:29, Michael G Schwern wrote;
>
> > YAML was chosen because its human readable and writable, its data
> ^ ^
> So long as you're a FREAK who likes INDENTING
Bruno Negrao wrote:
Hi Aristotle, (in portuguese your name is written "AristÃteles":)
I can't believe noone understood what you were talking about and
went off to lala-land. :-/
:-) hehehehe "lala-land", that was fun!
Yes, they simply ignored what I asked them.
Even if I use the technique you su
Hi Aristotle, (in portuguese your name is written "AristÃteles":)
> I can't believe noone understood what you were talking about and
> went off to lala-land. :-/
:-) hehehehe "lala-land", that was fun!
Yes, they simply ignored what I asked them.
Even if I use the technique you suggested, when an
* Bruno Negrao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-11-10 20:11]:
> IÅm finishing to write a module, Proc::Daemontools, and it
> requires that the daemontools package be installed on a machine
> for it to work. Where must I indicate that this module have a
> dependency?
I can't believe noone understood what
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Sam Vilain wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 02:29, Michael G Schwern wrote;
>
> > YAML was chosen because its human readable and writable, its data
> ^ ^
> So long as you're a FREAK who likes INDENTING and WHITESPACE to
>
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 02:29, Michael G Schwern wrote;
> YAML was chosen because its human readable and writable, its data
^ ^
So long as you're a FREAK who likes INDENTING and WHITESPACE to
signify STRUCTURE.
Is it any surprise that YAML is
> "Chris" == Christopher Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> So, if I understand this correctly, you're worried about the build
>> process eval'ing the contents of a file I sent you. Hmm.
>>
>> OK, why is that anymore of a concern for eval'ing the perl module I
>> also distributed, too? Is
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So, if I understand this correctly, you're worried about the build
> process eval'ing the contents of a file I sent you. Hmm.
>
> OK, why is that anymore of a concern for eval'ing the perl module I
> also distributed, too? Isn't that just as big a s
OK, maybe I'm missing a LOT of context here, 'cause I haven't been
agressively keeping up with this mailing list, but the security hole
argument seems a bit odd.
These META.yml files we're refering to -- these are meta data for
managing the build process, files that will be distributed along with
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 05:42:03PM -0800, Terrence Brannon wrote:
> >Thinking more about this, I guess META.yml would need to provide a
> >little more info to a configure module. Would something like the
> >following work?
>
> It's probably too late, but I am not keen on YAML. What is wrong with
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 03:49:54PM -0500, Randy W. Sims wrote:
> It would be nice to see functionality like this incorporated into a
> Module::Build::Configure package (or similar) along with other configure
> type routines common in current Makefile.PLs. Routines that find if libs
> or executab
Randy W. Sims wrote:
Thinking more about this, I guess META.yml would need to provide a
little more info to a configure module. Would something like the
following work?
It's probably too late, but I am not keen on YAML. What is wrong with
pure Perl configuration information? YAML is touchy abou
Randy W. Sims wrote:
darren chamberlain wrote:
* Randy W. Sims [2003-11-10 15:49]:
Also, as I noted in the AFS thread the other day, this info should be
written in META.yml so that cpan-testers can determine
programatically whether a module should be tested. Info like required
non-perl packa
darren chamberlain wrote:
* Randy W. Sims [2003-11-10 15:49]:
Also, as I noted in the AFS thread the other day, this info should be
written in META.yml so that cpan-testers can determine programatically
whether a module should be tested. Info like required non-perl packages
and libraries, whe
Hi Sherzod and everybody,
>If the whole library has a dependency, and wouldn't function as intended if
>they are found missing,
>then you have to let Makefile.PL to take care of it (read my prev. message
>to this thread).
Yes, without daemontools installed, my module has nothing else to do on tha
: > In my test script, I cause the test to fail if it
: cannot find a process,
: > 'svscan', running on the machine. Do you think that
: this can cause all the
: > cpan-testers to fail?
If the whole library has a dependency, and wouldn't function as intended if
they are foun
: ...but how would things like AFS be detectible?
Look into standard Config.pm, which will have all the information about
particular Perl installation.
* Randy W. Sims [2003-11-10 15:49]:
> Also, as I noted in the AFS thread the other day, this info should be
> written in META.yml so that cpan-testers can determine programatically
> whether a module should be tested. Info like required non-perl packages
> and libraries, whether the build/test/
darren chamberlain wrote:
* Bruno Negrao [2003-11-10 17:10]:
I?m finishing to write a module, Proc::Daemontools, and it requires that the
daemontools package be installed on a machine for it to work.
Where must I indicate that this module have a dependency? I already wrote
this on the README file
* Bruno Negrao [2003-11-10 17:10]:
> I?m finishing to write a module, Proc::Daemontools, and it requires that the
> daemontools package be installed on a machine for it to work.
> Where must I indicate that this module have a dependency? I already wrote
> this on the README file. Is there any othe
: Where must I indicate that this module have a dependency?
You have to indicate it in your Makefile.PL. Here is an example of a
Makefile.PL:
WriteMakefile(
NAME=> 'Class::PObject',
VERSION_FROM=> 'PObject.pm',
PREREQ_PM => {
'Storable' => 0,
Bruno Negrao wrote:
Hi all,
I´m finishing to write a module, Proc::Daemontools, and it requires that the
daemontools package be installed on a machine for it to work.
Where must I indicate that this module have a dependency?
I already wrote
this on the README file. Is there any other place?
Hi all,
I´m finishing to write a module, Proc::Daemontools, and it requires that the
daemontools package be installed on a machine for it to work.
Where must I indicate that this module have a dependency? I already wrote
this on the README file. Is there any other place?
In my test script, I caus
25 matches
Mail list logo
