On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 04:48:23PM +0200, demerphq wrote: > As an aside, it seems to me that both Devel::CheckLib and > configure_requires suffer from a fatal flaw in that they do not solve > the problem for existing modules.
Agreed. There are actually two problems to solve: * not sending bogus FAIL notices; * catching real failures an example of the first one would be sending a FAIL notice when a library is missing. And it is in fact easy to fix - just don't send any failure notices at all for the 'Makefile.PL' and 'make' steps. Unfortunately this means that an important class of error will be completely ignored. Number 2 above is all about catching things like "the author assumed everyone uses gcc" or "SVs don't look like that in 5.9.5". Devel::CheckLib etc will at least help us to get closer to these two ideals. I hope, however, that the CP6AN will make it obsolete by having: * tighter integration and better co-operation between the CP6AN, build tools, and testers; * clear documentation about what diagnostics to spit out and when -- David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david On the bright side, if sendmail is tied up routing spam and pointless uknot posts, it's not waving its arse around saying "root me!" -- Peter Corlett, in uknot
