On January 29th Tyler MacDonald wrote:
> Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Did anybody here have played with CPANPLUS::Dist::Deb?
> > http://search.cpan.org/dist/CPANPLUS-Dist-Deb/
> >
> > Believing its documentation, it should build a valid Debian package
> > and tak
Offer Kaye wrote:
On 2/6/06, Adam Kennedy wrote:
But I'm not really too worried any more, the CamelPack means it's much
easier not to just install from source than use the PPM system.
s/not/now/
Installing from souce == compiling every module that needs it... How
is that *easier* than inst
On 2/5/06, Offer Kaye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW Gozer have you looked at the first line:
> Cannot forceunlink D:\cpanrun\build\5-8-0\lib\auto\List\Util\Util.dll:
> Permission denied at D:\cpanrun\build\5-8-0\lib/File/Find.pm line 874
>
> Maybe the script is trying to delete a file that the s
On 2/6/06, Smylers wrote:
>
> So it seems the extra level of subdirectories are causing List::Util
> (and a whole bunch of other modules) not to show up in the main perl
> dist page.
>
> Is Cpan Search's heuristic for what gets included documented anywhere?
Now that I think about it, I seem to rec
Offer Kaye writes:
> I see what you mean... what threw me off was that [List::Util and
> Scalar::Util are] not listed under:
> http://search.cpan.org/dist/perl-5.8.8/
Well spotted! List/Util.pm (including pod) is here:
http://search.cpan.org/src/NWCLARK/perl-5.8.8/ext/List/Util/lib/List/Util.
Offer Kaye writes:
> On 2/5/06, Offer Kaye wrote:
>
> > [http://ppm.activestate.com/BuildStatus/5.8-windows/windows-5.8/Scalar-List-Util-1.15.txt
>
>
> Something funky here... Last night I looked at "Scalar-List-Util"...
> but the correct name as Tyler said is "Scalar-List-Utils", with an "s"
* Offer Kaye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-06 09:15]:
>Installing from souce == compiling every module that needs it...
>How is that *easier* than installing a pre-compiled package?
You don’t need sit there turning a crank while the compiler does
its job. Does it take longer? Sure. Is it harder? No
On 2/6/06, Adam Kennedy wrote:
>
> > But I'm not really too worried any more, the CamelPack means it's much
> > easier not to just install from source than use the PPM system.
>
> s/not/now/
>
Installing from souce == compiling every module that needs it... How
is that *easier* than installing a p
But I'm not really too worried any more, the CamelPack means it's much
easier not to just install from source than use the PPM system.
s/not/now/
sigh
Adam K
Tyler MacDonald wrote:
Offer Kaye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just an example, IO::All [1] version 0.33 has been available since Dec
17, 2004. It passed testing many times, at least according to its
testers page [2]. My default 5.8.7 ActivePerl distribution lists
IO::All version 0.17 .
On 2/6/06, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
>
> http://perldoc.perl.org/perl58delta.html#New-Modules-and-Pragmata
>
I see what you mean... what threw me off was that it is not listed under:
http://search.cpan.org/dist/perl-5.8.8/
Cheers,
--
Offer Kaye
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 08:16:11AM +0200, Offer Kaye wrote:
> OT question - why is Scalar-List-Utils listed as "CORE"? It is not
> part of the Perl5 core
http://perldoc.perl.org/perl58delta.html#New-Modules-and-Pragmata
On 2/5/06, Offer Kaye wrote:
>
> [3]
> http://ppm.activestate.com/BuildStatus/5.8-windows/windows-5.8/Scalar-List-Util-1.15.txt
>
Something funky here...
Last night I looked at "Scalar-List-Util"... but the correct name as
Tyler said is "Scalar-List-Utils", with an "s" at the end.
Looking at [1]
Offer Kaye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Phillipe Chaisson aka "Gozer" (one of the mod_perl authors) is
> > responsible for the ActiveState PPM repositories now,
> Hi Gozer, nice to meet you. Gratz on ActiveState's move to a new
> company, good luck :)
It's a Good Thing for all com
Offer Kaye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just an example, IO::All [1] version 0.33 has been available since Dec
> 17, 2004. It passed testing many times, at least according to its
> testers page [2]. My default 5.8.7 ActivePerl distribution lists
> IO::All version 0.17 .
According to
http:/
On 2/5/06, Tyler MacDonald wrote:
>
>ActiveState always serves the last available version where all tests
> passed on a given platform. It attempts to build and test every package on
> CPAN at least once a week. If something isn't available, it means the tests
> failed, which could mean:
>
On 2/5/06, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> On Sunday 05 February 2006 13:54, Tels wrote:
> > Moin Offer Kaye (sorry, can't identify which part of your name which is
> > the one you are called by :-)
> >
>
> Just for everybody's information:
>
> Offer is his first name. (Means "Bambi" in Hebrew).
Moin Tels, d
On Sunday 05 February 2006 13:54, Tels wrote:
> Moin Offer Kaye (sorry, can't identify which part of your name which is
> the one you are called by :-)
>
Just for everybody's information:
Offer is his first name. (Means "Bambi" in Hebrew). Kaye is his last name.
(Don't know what it means - it's
Tyler MacDonald wrote:
Offer Kaye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why not start off by providing ppm.cpan.org (as the OP suggested for
linux distors), or something similar? There are many modules that I
want to use where the PPM version provided by ActiveState or some
other repository is badly of out
Moin Offer Kaye (sorry, can't identify which part of your name which is
the one you are called by :-)
On Sunday 05 February 2006 07:59, Offer Kaye wrote:
> On 1/28/06, Tels wrote:
> > Of course you must reliaze that, except for pure-perl modules and
> > very controlled
Tyler MacDonald wrote:
3) Tests are failing because of ActiveState's build system
For 3), that could mean because the build system itself is screwed
or they don't have some library available.
Phillipe Chaisson aka "Gozer" (one of the mod_perl authors) is
responsible for
Offer Kaye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not start off by providing ppm.cpan.org (as the OP suggested for
> linux distors), or something similar? There are many modules that I
> want to use where the PPM version provided by ActiveState or some
> other repository is badly of out date..
A
On 1/28/06, Tels wrote:
>
> Of course you must reliaze that, except for pure-perl modules and very
> controlled environments, binary distributions are doomed to fail.
>
> You simple cannot guess what libraries/compiler/system/kernel the user
> has installed, unless you know th
On Sat, Jan 28, 2006 at 09:34:09AM -0800, Tyler MacDonald wrote:
>
> From what I gather, CPANPLUS is a linear package building
> system, whereas YACsmoke is a wrapper around that that tries to build as
> many packages as is humanly (er, computerly) possible on a system, with the
> si
Tels wrote:
On Saturday 28 January 2006 08:20, Tyler MacDonald wrote:
That is such an incredibly good idea. I've got plenty of bandwidth
to burn and I'm willing to set up debian.cpan.org.
Of course you must reliaze that, except for pure-perl modules and very
controlled environmen
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 17:13:40 -0800, Tyler MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> Andreas J. Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> FWIW, we're using dh-make-perl to create debian packages from CPAN
>> modules.
> Andreas,
> I've used this tool a few times when a CPAN module w
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:05:02 -0800, Tyler MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Did anybody here have played with CPANPLUS::Dist::Deb?
>> http://search.cpan.org/dist/CPANPLUS-Dist-Deb/
>>
>> Believing its documentation, i
Andreas J. Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW, we're using dh-make-perl to create debian packages from CPAN
> modules.
Andreas,
I've used this tool a few times when a CPAN module wasn't already
available in unstable/main, but I havent looked into it too closely. I'm
curious, does it
Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Did anybody here have played with CPANPLUS::Dist::Deb?
> http://search.cpan.org/dist/CPANPLUS-Dist-Deb/
>
> Believing its documentation, it should build a valid Debian package
> and take care of its dependencies (dunno if that means just li
Gabor Szabo wrote:
> I think I agree. That's what I would like to see solved. If I stick to
> the standard apt-get (or whatever) of my distribution I would like to be
> able to get all the CPAN modules by saying
>
> # apt-get install Module::Name
Did anybody here have played with CPANPLUS::Dist::
Gabor Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You simple cannot guess what libraries/compiler/system/kernel the user
> > has installed, unless you know the distribution and version *and* require
> > that the user never updates anything.
>
> I think I agree. That's what I would like to see solved. If
Barbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm one of the maintainers/developers for CPAN::YACSmoke. I was
> intrigued by your post about adding a Packager plugin to it. However,
> I'm unclear as to what purpose it would serve. CPAN::YACSmoke is purely
> about reporting on test results. CPANPLUS does the
distributions or by setting up repositories such as
> > > debian.cpan.org, fedora.cpan.org, etc...
> >
> > That is such an incredibly good idea. I've got plenty of bandwidth
> > to burn and I'm willing to set up debian.cpan.org.
>
> Of course you must r
ot plenty of bandwidth
> to burn and I'm willing to set up debian.cpan.org.
Of course you must reliaze that, except for pure-perl modules and very
controlled environments, binary distributions are doomed to fail.
You simple cannot guess what libraries/compiler/system/kernel the user
Gabor Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have just moved to Ubuntu and thought I will try to rely on apt-get
> to install my Perl modules. Quckly I hit a wall and could not install some
> of the basic modules. I did not have the time to investigate and check
> if I made a mistake or if there is a
Why do we need to reinvent this wheel ?
Most of the platforms out there have some binary packaging system.
Solaris has their own, Linuxen have rpm/deb or whatever else they have.
ActiveState with its binary Perl distributions have ppm and while that's
not perfect we read that they are working on f
36 matches
Mail list logo
