Re: [Module::Build] UNINST=1?

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

Tyler MacDonald wrote:
> I just tried installing a package I'm working on and got notified that I had
> an older version of the package installed. I was advised to run "make
> install UNINST=1" to get rid of this. That seemed odd to me, since I'm using
> Module::Build, not ExtUtils::MakeMaker. But I decided to try "Build install
> UNINST=1" and this is what I got: 

Where you installing with CPAN.pm? If its prefer_installer config option 
is set to EUMM, it will use the Makefile.PL in preference to the 
Build.PL. Recent versions of M::B (?>=0.26) will translate more common 
options: make install UNINST=1 will be translated and passed through to 
M::B as `Build install uninst=1`

> ## Running 'make install UNINST=1' will unlink all those files for you.

This is output from ExtUtils::Install. This module is currently part of 
ExtUtils::MakeMaker, but we use it for installing modules. It still has 
some cruft that needs to be cleaned up so that it can be used by other 
tools like M::B.

> 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. 
I think we just need to learn to work better with existing modules 
(ExtUtils::Install) and tools (CPAN.pm, CPANPLUS).

Randy.