----- Original Message ----- From: "Maggie X" <[email protected]>
To: "Sisyphus" <[email protected]>Cc: "David Mertens" <[email protected]>; "chm" <[email protected]>; "perldl" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 5:31 AM Subject: Re: [Perldl] PDL-Stats new release
Thanks for helping test and build the windows package!!
No problem. Having already uploaded the PDL-Stats-0.6.1 ppm packages, it eventually occurred to me that I hadn't done anything to update the database. (And ppm installations really *ought* to do everything that a "normal" install does.)
Instead of scanning blib for PDL::Stats functions, I changed add_doc.pl to scan the final installation location, ie somethinglike /usr/local/lib/perl/5.10.1/PDL/Stats. This works because add_doc.pl iscalled after the install process copies the modules to the final location.
Yes, that's essentially what I was proprosing.But if you scantree('/usr/local/lib/perl/5.10.1/PDL/Stats') you don't scan Stats.pm - which is why I thought you'd also want to
scan('/usr/local/lib/perl/5.10.1/PDL/Stats.pm')
Maggie, do you now not scan Stats.pm ?
I'll see try and see if this works on windows installing from source. Question is, will this work for ppm on windows?
I see from your follow-up that it works ok when installing from source. I don't think it will be any different when installing from ppm - it won't be hard for me to check (thanks Chris, David). My only query now is "should Stats.pm be scanned ?" (If it *is* scanned, The 'NAME' entry from the beginning of the PDL::Stats docs makes its way into pdldoc.db ... though I don't think anything else from those docs does.)
Cheers, Rob _______________________________________________ Perldl mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
