Mailing-List: contact apreq-dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 23:52:45 -0500 (CDT)
From: Randy Kobes <randy@theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca>
To: "Philip M. Gollucci" <pgollucci@p6m7g8.com>
cc: apreq-dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r408136 - /httpd/apreq/trunk/build/version_check.pl
In-Reply-To: <44713388.7050502@p6m7g8.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0605212349080.5684@theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca>
References: <20060521053609.A0A941A983A@eris.apache.org>
 <Pine.LNX.4.64.0605211758530.30870@theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca>
 <44713388.7050502@p6m7g8.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed

On Sun, 21 May 2006, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:

>> I'd prefer that no version of Archive::Tar be specified
>> for Win32, or perhaps even no such prerequisite at all;
>> it's a core module in ActivePerl, and has a history
>> of some instability on Win32 - an upgrade may break
>> things on the local system.
>> 
> I was trying to address this from Steven Hay's post:
>>> - When I ran "perl Makefile.PL --with-apache2=C:/apache2" I got an >>error 
> from win32/Configure.pl about Archive-Tar being missing, but >>this is not 
> mentioned in the PREREQUISITES file and was not checked by >>test_prereq in 
> Makefile.PL before calling this script.

It's a trade-off - Steve builds his own perl, so having
Archive::Tar as a prerequisite makes sense, but especially
requiring a particular version may mess up an ActivePerl
with an older version. So I think requiring version "0"
may be safest.

> I'm fine with whatever you say is best... I'm not a MS guy.
>
> I guess people on cygwin using the cygwin perl shouldn't be using the 
> win32/Configure.pl. (I don't think Steven is)

That's right, on both counts.

-- 
best regards,
Randy