Re: Dual-Build Modules (What to do if both Makefile.PL and Build.PL exist)

2009-05-17 Thread Jonathan Yu
Hi all: I just wanted to take a few minutes to thank everyone for their discussion, particularly Michael Schwern (maintainer of ExtUtils::MakeMaker among others) and Adam Kennedy (maintainer of Module::Install among others). I know this question comes up time and time again, and I had personally

Re: Dual-Build Modules (What to do if both Makefile.PL and Build.PL exist)

2009-05-08 Thread Michael G Schwern
Adam Kennedy wrote: > 2009/5/6 Jonathan Yu : >> The real question at hand here is: for modules that provide both a >> Makefile.PL and Build.PL, which should be preferred? More than that, >> from the perspective of CPAN authors, is it even useful to provide >> both? Now that Module::Build is a core

Re: Dual-Build Modules (What to do if both Makefile.PL and Build.PL exist)

2009-05-08 Thread Adam Kennedy
2009/5/6 Jonathan Yu : > The real question at hand here is: for modules that provide both a > Makefile.PL and Build.PL, which should be preferred? More than that, > from the perspective of CPAN authors, is it even useful to provide > both? Now that Module::Build is a core module, maybe only a Build

Re: Dual-Build Modules (What to do if both Makefile.PL and Build.PL exist)

2009-05-07 Thread Paul LeoNerd Evans
On Tue, 5 May 2009 19:09:30 -0700 Bill Ward wrote: > The way I've interpreted that in my own auto-build scripting is that if > Build.PL exists, the module author is probably a Module::Build user who is > only providing a Makefile.PL grudgingly for the sake of those who haven't > installed Module:

Dual-Build Modules (What to do if both Makefile.PL and Build.PL exist)

2009-05-06 Thread Jonathan Yu
Hi wise Perl authors: I've been building some Perl packages for Debian. I've noticed in the course of this that dh-make-perl (our preferred script for transforming Perl distributions into Debian packages) prefers Makefile.PL over Build.PL. One problem this has caused is that a Makefile is created

Re: Dual-Build Modules (What to do if both Makefile.PL and Build.PL exist)

2009-05-06 Thread Bill Ward
The way I've interpreted that in my own auto-build scripting is that if Build.PL exists, the module author is probably a Module::Build user who is only providing a Makefile.PL grudgingly for the sake of those who haven't installed Module::Build, and thus I figure that if there's any difference betw

Re: Dual-Build Modules (What to do if both Makefile.PL and Build.PL exist)

2009-05-05 Thread David Golden
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Jonathan Yu wrote: > Add to this some complication from Module::Install, which also uses > Makefile.PL. So in that case maybe Makefile.PL is preferred (for > Module::Install to do its thing) rather than Build.PL. (On the other > hand, I don't think I've seen module