Re: [Module::Build] UNINST=1?
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
kwilliams
|
From: Ken W. <ke...@ma...> - 2006-02-24 23:12:30
|
On Feb 21, 2006, at 11:35 AM, Tyler MacDonald wrote: > Randy W. Sims <ml...@th...> wrote: >>> It turned out I had to write "uninst=1" (lower case). I think we >>> should >>> either support the uppercase method, or somehow change the >>> warning message >>> that is displayed. In fact, doing both might be preferable. :) >>> The first >>> option is trivial ... I think the second one falls into this domain: >> >> The first option would set bad precedent. We'd then have people >> wanting >> direct translations of all MakeMakeresqe options. verbose, prefix, >> etc. > > Yeah, that's another thing I was going to mention. This subclassing > thing is great and all, but I really miss being able to just write > a "sub > MY::postamble" to paste makefile snippets for me... can we get that > put into > Module::Build as well? > > ... > > Kidding! Dude, you almost sent me into some kind of manic rage! =) > Seriously though, there's been quite the debate about > PREFIX and it sounds like people are working to get that into > Module::Build... No, it's actually been done for quite a while now in the 0.27_xx branch - yet another reason we really need to get that branch out the door. > I can understand Module::Build behaving differently where > it provides a technological advantage, but when there's a feature > that's > supported by both MM and MB and the difference is just a matter of > commandline syntax or terminology, shouldn't we be making MB's > syntax as > close as possible to MM's (or at least support MM's) to smooth the > transition? Yeah - my motto here is "compatible where possible". Definitely where it's possible to support EU::MM compatibility, we should do so. -Ken |