On Mon, 2008-28-04 at 18:46 +0200, Johan Vromans wrote: > Guy Hulbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > What about Module::Install ? > > I've had several discussions on whether to use EU::MM, M::B or M::I. > It was made very clear to me that M::I is too limited and crippled to
Thanks. I missed those discussions. [snip] > How would that be different from > > use lib 'path/to/lib'; My stupidity. [snip] > > EU::MM has support for editing modules on install > > Sure. But not trivially. Pretty close. > > > ... but since I am building a fairly large app, I've made it self > > installing. I also want to make sure that no-one can break it by > > polluting its name space and 'use lib' ensures that its own modules > > are found first. > > This is exactly the point I'm trying to make. Apparently the current > mechanisms are not sufficient to install non-trivial apps. This forces > you to write your own. I suspect that anything bigger than a module (or bundle) of them has too many variations to make the general problem easily tractable. If you look at GNU tools, there are a fairly tight set of packaging guidelines. For perl life is also complicated by TMTOWTDI. > > -- Johan -- --gh
