Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl-Sensitive Sunglasses

strawberry vs activestate perl

by targetsmart (Curate)
on May 25, 2009 at 07:44 UTC ( #765977=perlquestion: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??
targetsmart has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

I have been using perl 5.8.8 on Debian GNU/linux happily so far, I am new to perl on windows, what is the difference between strawberry perl and activestate perl

I did some search and got that
Strawberry uses CPAN and activestate uses ppm.
any other differences or opinions?

-- In accordance with the prarabdha of each, the One whose function it is to ordain makes each to act. What will not happen will never happen, whatever effort one may put forth. And what will happen will not fail to happen, however much one may seek to prevent it. This is certain. The part of wisdom therefore is to stay quiet.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: strawberry vs activestate perl
by syphilis (Chancellor) on May 25, 2009 at 08:20 UTC
    Strawberry uses CPAN and activestate uses ppm

    Nope - both CPAN and PPM are available on both StrawberryPerl and ActivePerl.

    The main difference is that StrawberryPerl comes with the MinGW compiler and dmake, whereas ActivePerl comes with no compiler and make utility at all. However, installing MinGW and dmake for use with ActivePerl is very easy - it's just a matter of running ppm install MinGW.

    As to which is better ... they're both very good.


      As an alternative:

      I used nmake. Depending on your IDE/platform you might have to download nmake from M$. I recall it used to be included in Visual Studio.

      You also need a C-compiler of course, see free compilers for some options. I used the bloodshed IDE (the Mingw compiler goes with that if I recall correctly).


        I recall spending long, arduous hours attempting to use nmake ... but could never get the perl Makefile.PL step to generate a make script that nmake didn't baulk at!!

        You'd never imagine the pleasure and indeed relief, I felt when some kind soul on this here site pointed me in the direction of Strawberry - an act for which I shall be eternally grateful :-D

        A user level that continues to overstate my experience :-))
Re: strawberry vs activestate perl
by Corion (Pope) on May 25, 2009 at 07:52 UTC

    Strawberry Perl also includes a preconfigured C compiler and make tool, so you can build XS components directly. Both distributions come with various precompiled modules, and you can even install PPMs into Strawberry Perl or compile PPMs with Strawberry Perl for ActiveState Perl. If you need commercial support, ActiveState Perl is better, because there is an office that will send you an invoice.

      If you need commercial support, ActiveState Perl is better

      You wish;-)

      Fair enough, I worked a few years with ActiveState Perl on Windows and it has served me well. Meaning as long as there is a ppm that installs correctly... In my experience ActiveState is not too responsive in case of problems, e.g. if you issue a bug report you're likely to hear nothing ever after.

        Ah - but commercial support is important for a different reason (you're aware of this, but others might not be). In certain places, you are not allowed to introduced "unsupported" software. And support necessarily means getting an invoice, and budgeting for that invoice. That's the advantage ActiveState has over Strawberry. How responsive AS are with their support I don't know, but I'm not the one paying our AS contract or opening tickets with them :).

Re: strawberry vs activestate perl
by grinder (Bishop) on May 25, 2009 at 08:56 UTC

    I had trouble getting GD to install on Strawberry. As in "I gave up". Other than that I am very fond of Strawberry.

    I realise that it should be fairly easy to download the GD C library source and compile it, and then use it to build the XS component of GD. I fiddled around for a while and since I was pressed for time, I just installed the GD.ppm module for Activestate and generated the graphs I needed to generate.

    In other words, AS and Strawberry coexist peacefully on the same machine, so you can always use both. Executing a particular perl binary by specifying its full path is sufficient for it to locate the libraries that belong to it. The question comes down to which one you wish to use by default when you run 'perl' from a DOS box. That just depends on your PATH setting.

    • another intruder with the mooring in the heart of the Perl

      I just installed the GD.ppm module for Activestate

      You didn't say whether you 'ppm install'ed it into Strawberry Perl or ActivePerl - you should be able to do either.

Re: strawberry vs activestate perl
by Burak (Chaplain) on May 26, 2009 at 21:13 UTC
    Strawberry also misses all the ActiveState binaries:
    • PerlIS - ISAPI extension for IIS
    • PerlEx - Although no longer supported/developed, this the persistent environment under IIS
    • PerlScript - ActiveX Engine that runs on wherever VBS & JScript runs like the (Classic) ASP, WSH, etc
Re: strawberry vs activestate perl
by ikegami (Pope) on May 25, 2009 at 17:02 UTC
    Strawberry Perl's installation directory is hardcoded (so you can only have one version installed), but you can install to any directory with ActivePerl.
      Strawberry Perl's installation directory is hardcoded

      They've recently made available alternative distro's that include a zip package which can, I believe, be unpacked to any location.


Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: perlquestion [id://765977]
Approved by wfsp
Front-paged by citromatik
and the grasshoppers chirp...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others perusing the Monastery: (2)
As of 2017-06-27 23:27 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    How many monitors do you use while coding?

    Results (617 votes). Check out past polls.