On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 09:16:28 -0400, Jonathan Yu wrote:
> I do believe recursive packaging is a work in progress for
> dh-make-perl, so that will be a moot point in due time.
IIRC there's a bug report and it has been discussed; I guess it
doesn't exist yet because nobody's itch was painful enough to write
the code for it :)
> I suppose the
> idea is that dh-make-perl is more for us pkg-perl people, and that
> cpan2dist is more for other people who just want to install a package.
IMO dh-make-perl is also fine for just creating local packages, but
I'm fine with everybody using the tools they like.
> I think the key take-away from this article is that we should work on
> dh-make-perl (I can volunteer to spend very limited time hacking on
> it) to get it to recursively package things,
IMO it's quite easy at the moment: dh-make-perl tells you which
modules are missing, and you just call it again with these module
names.
This also probably means that adding the option should be easy as the
missing modules are already known ...
> and to create a much
> quicker & dirtier package when --pkg-perl is not specified.
Hm? Why should it deliberately create "worse" packages? I guess I
am misunderstanding something here :)
Cheers,
gregor
--
.''`. Home: http://info.comodo.priv.at/{,blog/} / GPG Key ID: 0x00F3CFE4
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/
`. `' Member of VIBE!AT, SPI Inc., fellow of FSFE | http://got.to/quote/
`- NP: The Doors: Roadhouse Blues
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature