http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=859143


in reply to Re^2: Packaging Perl Programs (is) Painful
in thread Packaging Perl Programs (is) Painful

Just lost my reply due to "Preview" ne "Submit". Oops. I'll keep it short:

Doing this kind of thing would be fragile if attempted for the "general case". I.e. all elements of the "platform X compiler tool chain" matrix. In particular, we'd need a blacklist of libraries to never package. Maybe an interactive front-end that prompts the user to select which of the detected dependencies he really wants, etc.

I'd love to have this even just for some platforms, but in a way that doesn't end up with users plastering "PAR is broken on platform X!" all over the internet if this particular bit of functionality is not available for their favourite OS.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Packaging Perl Programs (is) Painful
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 07, 2010 at 13:16 UTC
    In particular, we'd need a blacklist of libraries to never package.

    Um, yeah, some logic needs to be worked out ... PPM/DEB/RPM... packagers all manage to avoid packing c-runtime... should be able to borrow some ideas/lists from them. On win32 you can filter system dlls by %windir%.

    I'd love to have this even just for some platforms, but in a way that doesn't end up with users plastering "PAR is broken on platform X!" all over the internet if this particular bit of functionality is not available for their favourite OS.

    I don't see how it can get worse than the current situation. PAR needs a one-click-checkout, patents be damned :)