Re: [Module::Build] win32 install problem

[Ben L. <bla...@gm...>]

> > As it turns out, though, installing it manually via copying from
> > the tar.gz (ugh), as you suggest, did the trick just fine.  M::B
>
> No, I did not suggest that. I suggested you could install it in the official
> manner, so to speak, from Randy's site, or download it and install it like any
> other module.
>
> I certainly like to see /exactly/ what was happening when it did not install gor
> you.

With ppm version 2.1.6, I would attempt to install A::T.  It was a
very old version, and ppm would find an upgrade.  Upon a verify
--upgrade for AT, I'd get that the package was already up to date.
Some web searching told me that many people have had similar problems
with ppm version 2 (it seems version 3 is not so troublesome), as
version 2 doesn't much like to upgrade packages it is using, and
reporting that a package is already up to date is ppm2's backwards way
of saying 'I can't do that'.  There wasn't an accepted solution out
there for dealing with it via ppm 2, I found cases 4 pages into google
results of people who had to upgrade their AS installation entirely to
get around the problem for an important module which required c
compliation (details having since taken their leave of me).

Installing AT from the tgz or via the CPAN module got me nowhere.
Perl actually crashes halfway through the tests, suggesting I let
Microsoft know about this problem.  Along with this came an
all-too-telling message, after reading previous messages on this
thread, that long filename extraction support would be disabled.

Whenever I removed AT manually, ppm wouldn't start, plain and simple.
Putting it back fixed the problem.  You said:
o Install local copy of V 1.29 'manually' (via a program actually)
which gave me the idea to just throw the .pm files in the correct
location, which I did.  I'm not sure what you did here, but after
this, your ppm would run again.  Mine ran again too, after I installed
it manually, but even a forced verify upgrade gives me a reassuring
message that AT is up to date, just as before, so I don't really see
how to duplicate your behavior.

Ben

Ben