John Nolan wrote:

That being said, however, I do not think it's the right way to
implement tarballs for the CPAN script archive.

I think this would be an appropriate time for the mailing list
maintainer and/or the CPAN script archive maintainer to weigh in
with an opinion.
I am neither, but I'll weigh in anyway. :-)

MO: shar is the right paradigm. The downside is that shar is not
portable. Perl is, of course; so it makes sense to make a perl
equivalent of the shar utility. And it, and the scripts it
generates, should not depend on anything other than a standard
distribution of perl.

Perl has uu*code built in, so that should take care of any
binaries. Apart from that, a more-or-less straight port of
shar to perl would be the way to go... IMHO.

OTOH, MakeMaker is certainly capable of handling the installation
and configuration of scripts, as much as of modules. The downside
is that not all machines have a compatible make.

John Porter

Papa! Es un gringo en la calle con su coche!

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 5 of 14 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupscripts @
postedMar 7, '00 at 12:37a
activeMar 15, '00 at 5:06p



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase