Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Syntactic Confectionery Delight
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Building the 'pp' module on windows.

by dasgar (Curate)
on May 29, 2012 at 15:29 UTC ( #973049=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Building the 'pp' module on windows.

If I deciphered the messages in your post correctly, it looks like you're trying to install version 1.013 PAR::Packer on Strawberry Perl 5.12.3 (32-bit). Is that correct?

To see if I could replicate your CPAN install issue, I tried to install PAR::Packer into portable Strawberry Perl 5.12.3.0 (32-bit) by typing the following: cpan install PAR::Packer

On my first attempt, it installed all the prereq modules, but PAR::Packer itself failed. My second attempt, I tried the force flag (cpan install -f PAR::Packer). It installed just fine that time.

Are you sure that you can't install PAR::Packer 1.013 via CPAN?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Building the 'pp' module on windows.
by balajinagaraju (Sexton) on May 30, 2012 at 03:02 UTC
    Hi , Thanks for your response , i was installing the 'pp' module not the PAR::Packer, and it failed through CPAN i haven't tried the force option i will probably try that and see if it works.
      i was installing the 'pp' module not the PAR::Packer

      Hmmmm.....ok. Perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about, but pp is part of PAR::Packer and I personally don't know how to install pp without installing PAR::Packer, especially since the documentation of PAR::Packer states:

      Currently, this module is used by the command line tool pp internally, as well as by the contributed contrib/gui_pp/gpp program.

      Plus, it's been my experience that every time I've installed PAR::Packer, the pp utility has been installed.

      D:\temp\temp\PAR-Packer-1.013\PAR-Packer-1.013>perl Makefile.PL

      That's from your original post. Unless you modified Makefile.PL, it definitely looks like you're installing PAR::Packer to me.

      But if you still want to insist that you're installing pp and not PAR::Packer, then I think you might want to share how you're modifying the contents of PAR-Packer-1.013.tar.gz to install just pp without PAR::Packer. That will help others understand that you're needing help with your modified install instead of needing help with installing unmodified package from CPAN.

      Of course, if you feel that I have no clue about what I'm saying, please feel free to downvote my responses and/or ignore my attempts to offer assistance.

      PAR-Packer-1.013 will not install on strawberry perl - try patched version:

      http://strawberryperl.com/package/kmx/perl-modules-patched/PAR-Packer-1.013_patched.tar.gz

      --kmx

        PAR-Packer-1.013 will not install on strawberry perl - try patched version:

        Yes it will , PAR-Packer-1.013 has absolutely no problem building on 32-bit strawberryperl 5.12.3, the version the OP is using, if only the OP would stop trying to use nmake when he should be using dmake

        Thank You very much. It works

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://973049]
help
Chatterbox?
[stevieb]: I find the M::S makefiles it generates are quite straight forward, and I usually have to add a few things (github info etc). They're about 15 lines or so give or take.
[Corion]: I don't think the EUMM-generated Makefile is that complicated ;)
[stevieb]: Corion++
[jedikaiti]: RonW++ #I have so much accumulated in my memory that finding the right item at a given moment often fails
[LanX]: corion only > 800 lines
[stevieb]: ahhh you're talking about the actual Makefile, not the PP Makefile.PL
[Corion]: LanX: But most of that is just setup of variables to be used later, like CC , LIB etc.
[LanX]: yes and some builders try to avoid it

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others avoiding work at the Monastery: (7)
As of 2017-08-18 21:02 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    Who is your favorite scientist and why?



























    Results (310 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?