Mon Jun 23 11:06:50 2014: Request 95809 was acted upon.
Transaction: Correspondence added by sisyph...@optusnet.com.au
       Queue: Inline
     Subject: Re: [rt.cpan.org #95809] [PATCH] Using Inline in a distribution 
with multiple modules
   Broken in: (no value)
    Severity: (no value)
       Owner: Nobody
  Requestors: s...@parasite.cc
      Status: open
 Ticket <URL: https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=95809 >


-----Original Message----- 
From: Ed J via RT
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2014 11:12 AM

> Forgive my ignorance, including of MakeMaker - would it be possible to 
> make a test for the generality of building a module, by installing it into 
> a temporary directory, probably under /tmp? This would probably require 
> using something like SITE_INSTALL? If that's right, let me know (or 
> correct me), and I'll knock something up.

There's now modules/Math-Simple-1.23 and modules/Boo-2.01 that ship with the 
Inline source. (They're laid out differently - which is the reason that 
there's *two* modules.)

I'm thinking along the lines that the test could be constructed so that we:

1) cd to modules/Math-Simple-1.23;
2) check that 'perl -Mblib Makefile.PL INSTALL_BASE=../../_Inline_test' 
succeeds;
3) check that  '$Config{make} test' succeeds;
4) check that  '$Config{make} install' succeeds;
5) check that  '$Config{make} realclean' succeeds;

and do the same for modules/Boo-2.01.
I was thinking that could be done via system commands, but I'm not sure if 
that's such a good idea given the odd configurations that some smokers seem 
to come up with.

Anyway, then we can rely on 'make clean' to clean up the installed modules 
(since it already cleans up the _Inline_test directory).

Trying to find the temporary directory seems messy to me - though File::Spec 
probably helps out. Since we already know that _Inline_test is writable, why 
not install the modules into there and let 'make clean' remove them ?

I don't regard such tests as critical (obviously), but they would be a 
useful addition to the test suite , imo - irrespective of precisely *how* 
you choose to implement them.

Cheers,
Rob 


Reply via email to