Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl Monk, Perl Meditation
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Re^3: perl2exe - no more secrets

by Vennis (Pilgrim)
on Feb 24, 2003 at 14:47 UTC ( #238128=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^3: perl2exe - no more secrets
in thread perl2exe - no more secrets

The PAR solution available is no argument for NOT using PerApp or perl2exe if it is just about being able to redistribute Perl software without Perl installation.

That's just another way. Also (slightly) more complex if you are used to download ActiveState Perl Install-executables and use PPM for module installation.

Q: Why did the Perlmonk cross the road?
A: He wanted to escape the match.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re^3: perl2exe - no more secrets
by Anonymous Monk on Feb 25, 2003 at 23:30 UTC
    The PAR solution available is no argument for NOT using PerApp or perl2exe if it is just about being able to redistribute Perl software without Perl installation.
    Yes it is. Why pay for perlapp/perl2exe when you get PAR for free?

      Why use PAR when the company is willing to buy the Perl Dev Kit?

      Why not use both? I will use PAR for scripts I write for other people. But for the company, I will use PerlApp since it is there.

      Because, perl2exe and perlapp are easy installed ready to run programs. If buying a 30 dollar (i dont know the exact prices) ready2run program saves me 1 hour, i'm earning money.

      That is beside the fact that PAR is fun to play with :-)

      Q: Why did the Perlmonk cross the road?
      A: He wanted to escape the match.

        I will be very happy to know, especially after a massively revamped autoinstall system in PAR 0.66, that what about PAR is still not easy installed and ready to run. :)

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://238128]
help
Chatterbox?
erix is not interested what the imbecile-in-chief has to say -- only what he will do
[GotToBTru]: that sounds fair to me
[davies]: I've just "approved" using syscalls in perl through inline c for at least the third time, but it still appears to me as unapproved. Is this just me?
[LanX]: erix: other side of the pond
[LanX]: davies: same problem
[Corion]: It had been approved as a Perl Monks Discussion. It should now be approvable into SoPW
[choroba]: Approved

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others drinking their drinks and smoking their pipes about the Monastery: (16)
As of 2017-01-16 15:05 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    Do you watch meteor showers?




    Results (151 votes). Check out past polls.