> From: Judd Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Henning Glawe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:39:36 -0500
>
> I wonder if this is an architecture dependent
> issue? I only put the second line in there to
> solve problems with the tests being skipped b/c
> it didn't see HDF.pm in the lib path (the _exact_
> same thing you're seeing, but the longer path
> fixed it).
I think the fix for the tests being skipped was the
pdlpp_postamble_int() instead of pdlpp_postamble().
> Any ideas on the difference in these two lines,
> and which is the "PDL module best practice"?
I took a look at all of the other usages for the PM =>
with $(INST_LIBDIR) and the plain first line (commented
out in rel_2_4_3pre but uncommented to work by HG is
the standard usage. If you use HG's fix, does it work
for you on a clean install?
I can't test myself since HDF is not yet on cygwin.
If we can get two folks to verify the correct fix is
working then I will update the release candidate. My
priority now is to avoid breakage before the release.
--Chris
> On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 13:11 +0200, Henning Glawe wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 07:05:09PM -0400, Chris Marshall wrote:
> >
> > > Please run the usual build tests and let me know
> > > about any problems.
> >
> > another minor problem:
> > HDF.pm is installed to /usr/lib/perl5/PDL/IO/PDL/IO/HDF.pm
> > instead of /usr/lib/perl5/PDL/IO/HDF.pm
> >
> > this is due to line 161 in IO/HDF/Makefile.pl; for me, the
> > commented-out line 160 seems more reasonable:
> >
> > PM => {
> > #'HDF.pm' => '$(INST_LIBDIR)/HDF.pm',
> > 'HDF.pm' => '$(INST_LIBDIR)/PDL/IO/HDF.pm',
> > },
> >
_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
