[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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

-=| Jonathan Yu, Thu, May 07, 2009 at 11:49:48PM -0400 |=-
> If, however, both Build.PL and Makefile.PL are included in a
> distribution, then more than likely it is a Build.PL base with either
> a passthrough or traditional (generated by
> Build.PL/Module::Build::Compat) EUMM Makefile.PL.

I agree that using the "native" configuration script should be better 
than using an auto-generated one provided only for backward 
compatibility (and perhaps not that well tested).

Practice, however shos that both work just fine. Is there a case when 
using Makefile.PL instead of Build.PL has caused problems?

> In this case, it means that Makefile.PL will not pick up things like
> 'suggests' and 'recommends' and 'conflicts'. On the other hand, these
> can always be picked up by the debhelper scripts via META.yml. I,

er, debhelper has nothing to do with META :)

> however, don't know the source of that stuff for dh-make-perl.

Currently there is no such thing. I am working on adding support to 
generic debian/control file handling that also allows for easy 
synchronisation between META.yml and debian/control. Stay tuned, 
commit expeced to happen this week(-end).


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: