Re: [vhffs] new perl script to track perl modules dependencies

[Sébastien Le Ray <beuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Le Mon, 05 Mar 2007 08:26:50 +0000,
Alexandre Ghisoli <alexandre.ghisoli@xxxxxxx> a écrit :

> Le lundi 05 mars 2007 à 08:47 +0100, Sébastien Le Ray a écrit :
> > Le Sun, 04 Mar 2007 23:08:08 +0100,
> > Alexandre Ghisoli <alexandre.ghisoli@xxxxxxx> a écrit :
> > 
> > > Hi ppl, 
> > Hi
> > > 
> > > While working on the autotools version of vhffs (where you can use
> > > configure and friends), I've noticed that I cannot use anymore the
> > > perl modules dependencies test in current Makefile.
> > > 
> > > So, there is a new perl file that could help tracking
> > > dependencies and auto-install them on the system, via perl CPAN
> > > or any user's provided command.
> > > 
> > > The new script is quite different, it let you specify wich vhffs
> > > component you want to check, or the whole stuff.
> > > 
> > > I've parsed all perl files to track dependencies, but I could
> > > missed few.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Take a look and feel free to suggest / comment.
> > 
> > It sounds cool but the main supported distrib is debian, maybe we
> > could modify the script to support this distrib. As far as I
> > understand, you can specify a command but it will be called with
> > the packagename as an argument (apt-get install MIME::Lite) which
> > won't work. Maybe we could improve the existing hash : {component}
> > -> {module} -> {distrib} -> {package name (or command)}...
> 
> Sébastien, 
> 
> I can understand that vhffs is debian centric, but if you want more
> adopters, you should make it more open to others distribs.

Yes, that's why I exposed a solution which was not debian centric...

> 
> You should probably take care of dependencies in a .dep packages, and
> not in a makefile.

That's right, but in this case what's the purpose of the --install
switch ?

> (take a look in my ebuild, dependencies are managed directly by the
> system package management .. much more elegant).
> 
> To get more vhffs developers, users and happy customers, this project
> need to stick more to the commons OOS rules ;) (this is why I'm
> working on configure autotools ...)

Thanks for that, we really need some autotools integration

> 
> At the end, I can add the hash you speak about, this is not a big
> deal.
> 
> In the same time, is there any specific module version that we should
> take care of (ex. DBI 1.43, ...) ?

I don't know what specific version we need, I suppose that any recent
version is ok...

> 
> Best regards
> 
Regards

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature