[Module::Build] Re: [PATCH] add Module::Build 0.27_08

[Randy W. S. <ml...@th...>]

Dominic Dunlop wrote:
> On 2006–03–07, at 16:24, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 06:38:13AM -0500, Randy W. Sims wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Looks like the problem happens here:
> 
> ...
> 
>>>   foreach my $perl ( $c->{perlpath},
>>>              map File::Spec->catfile($_, $thisperl),
>>>              File::Spec->path()
>>>            ) {
>>>     return $perl if -f $perl and $proto->_perl_is_same($perl);
>>>   }
>>>
>>> Where we try to find the interpreter. It's falling all the way  through
>>> and returning undef. Any idea where we're missing it here?
>>
>>
>> It should be finding it in $c->{perlpath}.  Dominic, can you add a
>>
>>   warn "checking in $_, \$^X is $^X, perl is $perl, -f \$perl is ",  
>> -f $perl;
> 
>                       ^^
> Um, the $_ that is the topic of the map() is out of scope at the top  of 
> the loop, and there doesn't seem to be another relevant one in  scope. 
> But, because I can't suggest anything better...
> 
>>
>> at the beginning of the loop and a
>>
>>   warn "not found"
>>
>> at the end?
> 
> 
> With your additions as suggested, I get
> 

Ah, this is because we don't expect to be run from a non-installed perl. 
Notice we pretty much throw $^X away if it's not absolute? Is there any 
reason we can't add:

   return $^X if $proto->_perl_is_same($^X);

at the top of find_perl_interpreter(). Or do we need to be more guarded?

Randy.