----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Carrera" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 6:33 AM Subject: [Perldl] Modularizing PDL
> Hello all, > > After my recent experience, I can really see the merit in modularizing > PDL. It is possible that my frustration would have been smaller if TriD > were separate from PDL. Yes, I often think it's a pity that there's not a (much smaller) PDL core package that builds and installs reliably - after which people can install whichever additional packages they like. It would certainly make troubleshooting a problem with building a particular package much less frustrating. > While fighting with PDL / TriD / CPAN / OpenGL, at times I feared that > I had just hosed my entire PDL or CPAN installation. I did not enjoyed > deleting ~/.cpan and /usr/local/.../PDL and I worried about what effect > that might have. You shouldn't have to do any of that. If you want to use CPAN, 'cpan -fi PDL' should have done the trick for you. Or you could avoid CPAN altogether, 'cd' to the PDL build directory (ie the directory into which the PDL source has been unpacked) and run the whole build and install procedure manually - by running 'perl Makefile.PL', 'make test' and 'make install' (and running 'make realclean' if you're at a stage where you need to start over from scratch again.) Running 'make install' (or 'sudo make install' if that's applicable) will always overwrite any existing installation. > > Of course, the real goal is for TriD to "just work". But I can see how > modularizing PDL is a step in the right direction. > There are, no doubt, arguments in support of keeping it as an "all in one" download - but I'll let soemeone else outline them (as I'm with you on this). Cheers, Rob _______________________________________________ Perldl mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
