Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
The stupid question is the question not asked
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Funny fonts in ActivePerl under Linux

by ww (Bishop)
on Mar 04, 2013 at 19:54 UTC ( #1021704=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Funny fonts in ActivePerl under Linux

I don't think I understand your problem.... or at least, I don't understand why you're "(c)ross-packaging (some) code using PerlApp (9.1.1)." (Why? What's wrong with moving it across your LAN; sneaker-net-ing; or using FTP?
PerlApp does NOT compile your script; it packages it together with it's known dependent modules and what AS calls a "modified" Perl interpreter, but the script still has to be compiled and executed on the target machine.)

My understanding is (in effect) that you're using the "packaging" with the AS utility called PerlApp to move scripts from the Win box to the Mint box... and don't like the way the script looks when you reopen the script in an editor or cat it to a term (or are you unhappy with the font used for whatever OUTPUT the script generates?).

Alternately, I might read your node as a description of moving scripts from the Win box to the *nix box, then running the script on the 'nix box under what you think is "the very same ActivePerl (5.14.3.1404)" and begin dissatisfied with the appearance of the output, wherever you're seeing it.

Are you really sure the Active Perl on the 'nix box was compiled with all the exact same options/libs/etc as the M$ Win version? My reaction is "maybe," but I don't quite buy it... and while I won't spend time researching that, you might want to do so. And, of course, given the way PerlApp actually works, you're likely to have issues with fonts because those on your Win box are NOT identical to the 'nix flavor.

Acknowledged, of course, that both may be mis-understandings.

In either case, please clarify your problem statement. And note also that you've used some very subjective standards ("poor" & "plotting 20 years ago") to describe the problem. Can you provide something more nearly objective -- even, for example, screen shots in dropbox or similar.


If you didn't program your executable by toggling in binary, it wasn't really programming!


Comment on Re: Funny fonts in ActivePerl under Linux
Download Code
Re^2: Funny fonts in ActivePerl under Linux
by marto (Chancellor) on Mar 05, 2013 at 10:23 UTC

    "I don't think I understand your problem.... or at least, I don't understand why you're "(c)ross-packaging (some) code using PerlApp (9.1.1)." (Why? What's wrong with moving it across your LAN; sneaker-net-ing; or using FTP?"

    Creating a package can have advantages over moving much code ensuring that the target systems have all prerequisite modules installed. Such things can confuse end users who just expect to run an app. See PAR, pp and these slides for further enlightenment.

    "PerlApp does NOT compile your script; it packages it together with it's known dependent modules and what AS calls a "modified" Perl interpreter, but the script still has to be compiled and executed on the target machine.)"

    OP made no claim to be compiling scripts, they explicitly state they create packaging an app. I'm not sure why you're telling them this.

    "My understanding is (in effect) that you're using the "packaging" with the AS utility called PerlApp to move scripts from the Win box to the Mint box... and don't like the way the script looks when you reopen the script in an editor or cat it to a term (or are you unhappy with the font used for whatever OUTPUT the script generates?)."

    Unlikley. It's far more likely to be a problem relating to a GUI toolkit, my guess.

      1. marto said: "I'm not sure why you're telling them this."

      Because the totality of the OP's "headaches" (and the one that's not a painful "szenario" -- the perfect rendering with the native (Mint) Perl) -- suggested to me that OP does NOT understand the merits and costs of packaging versus simply moving the script.

      2. marto said: "Unlikley." (sic)

      I think your surmise about a toolkit ( and moritz' earlier response ) are likely to home in on the real problem, but your "unlikley" is -- IMO -- off-target: its antecedant is not an unlikely bit of advice or worthless suggestion, but, rather, (part of) my bid to have OP clarify the problem-statement (see the last two paras).


      If you didn't program your executable by toggling in binary, it wasn't really programming!

        I said "OP made no claim to be compiling scripts, they explicitly state they create packaging an app. I'm not sure why you're telling them this." Your response to this is that they're confused about packaging? You clearly make a distinction between packaging and compiling. OP at no point mentions compiling, which is why I was confused as to why you were telling them they weren't compiling anything. PerlApp is a tool which costs money, chances are OP understands packaging and has good reason to do so.

        Unlikely (excuse my previous typo) is used aptly, IMHO, as the scenario you suggest is indeed a misunderstanding of OPs problem. As stated in my response, I encourage OP to clarify their issue. No offense intended.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1021704]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chanting in the Monastery: (4)
As of 2014-10-20 23:48 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    For retirement, I am banking on:










    Results (93 votes), past polls