On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 13:24:06 +0200, Angel Abad (Indio) wrote:
> > I will ask to upstream, but I think the recompilation of Grammar is
> > only for Config::Scope developers.
That was indeed a good idea.
> The upstream author email me this:
> "you are right, the P::RD is only necessary if a developer
> wants to change parts of the grammar. A module user doesn't
> need the patch. He should not patch his P::RD module."
Ok.
> So, I think if the user doesnt need the patch I can package the module
> without patch.
The question is if the patch is used during building of the package
(the .tgz in the source package doesn't hurt IMO).
My first impression was that it is used via Makefile{,.PL}; now I
tried to build it after moving patched-prd.tgz away, and it works,
and the outut doesn't show any signs of using the patch either.
So I guess all is fine, and my alarm clocks went off a bit early ...
Cheers,
gregor
--
.''`. http://info.comodo.priv.at/ | gpg key ID: 0x00F3CFE4
: :' : debian gnu/linux user, admin & developer - http://www.debian.org/
`. `' member of https://www.vibe.at/ | how to reply: http://got.to/quote/
`- BOFH excuse #308: CD-ROM server needs recalibration
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature