Re: [Boston.pm] CPAN distributions

2005-03-03 Thread Uri Guttman
> "BR" == Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: BR> As machines get faster and ease of cross-platform installation gets more BR> important, I expect the need for C-level hackery will go down. I BR> suspect this is overused even at present. Several years ago, I wound up BR>

Re: [Boston.pm] CPAN distributions

2005-03-03 Thread Bob Rogers
From: Tom Metro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 18:45:21 -0500 Sean Quinlan wrote: > ...Parrot will be able to save and reuse it's bytecode, > which might give you something close to a platform specific executable... Wasn't the objective a non-platform specific way

RE: [Boston.pm] CPAN distributions

2005-03-03 Thread Ricker, William
> Surprisingly Active State maintains a Perl distribution for (RedHat) > Linux (or at least they did), and I believe a repository of PPMs as well. And also Solaris and IBM AIX. I think the Linux Perl build and PPMs are likely to run on any reasonably normal Intel Linux, but not sure -- with the

Re: [Boston.pm] CPAN distributions

2005-03-03 Thread Sean Quinlan
On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 15:46 -0500, Duane Bronson wrote: > CPAN bundles: > Aren't CPAN bundles always source distributions? PPM is actually > better than CPAN because it's a pre-built distribution, except that it > only works with Windows (I think) and if a build fails, the last working >

[Boston.pm] CPAN distributions

2005-03-03 Thread Duane Bronson
CPAN bundles: Aren't CPAN bundles always source distributions? PPM is actually better than CPAN because it's a pre-built distribution, except that it only works with Windows (I think) and if a build fails, the last working build is blown away and the module is unavailable. RPM alternative: