From: Zach White
Date: 04:08 on 05 May 2007
Subject: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways...
So I'm installing RT because we need some sort of ticketing system at work.
I build a box, install everything I can from packages and check to see what
has to get installed by hand. Only 4 perl modules missing, not too shabby.
So I run "make fixdeps" which supposedly uses CPAN to install what's
missing. Mistake number 1.
Install module Date::Format
You didn't configure CPAN shell yet.
Please run `/usr/bin/perl -MCPAN -e shell` tool and configure it.
*** Error code 1
I guess including a set of sensible defaults for CPAN is out of the
question.
Ok, so I run that, it asks if I'm ready for manual configuration. Knowing
I'll just end up hitting enter a bunch I decide to let it pick defaults
which should be sensible. Mistake number 2.
CPAN: Storable loaded ok
CPAN: LWP::UserAgent loaded ok
Fetching with LWP:
ftp://ftp.perl.org/pub/CPAN/authors/01mailrc.txt.gz
LWP failed with code[400] message[FTP return code 150]
Fetching with Net::FTP:
ftp://ftp.perl.org/pub/CPAN/authors/01mailrc.txt.gz
Couldn't fetch 01mailrc.txt.gz from ftp.perl.org
No matter what it does CPAN can't seem to fetch that URL. I can fetch that
URL with curl. I can fetch it with FTP. I can fetch it with lynx. Why can't
perl fetch it? Even with lynx -dump?
So, maybe I shouldn't have gone with the defaults. I find a friend who
actually uses the collection of bugs known as perl and ask him how I
redo the cpan config.
A bunch of enter pressing later followed by picking a couple sites and I've
configured it.
Is it really so hard to include a sane set of defaults with CPAN? Why must
I go through these acrobatics? In 2007 do we really need to make each and
every person who uses perl set paths to programs that are standard and
located in the path? Is it part of some conspiracy to wear out my enter
key? How many questions can a(n) (in)sane person put in one paragraph?
-Zach (Who was mostly sane before starting on this nonsense today)
From: A. Pagaltzis Date: 07:53 on 05 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... * Zach White <zwhite-hates-software@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx> [2007-05-05 05:15]: > Is it really so hard to include a sane set of defaults with > CPAN? Why must I go through these acrobatics? In 2007 do we > really need to make each and every person who uses perl set > paths to programs that are standard and located in the path? I consider that a distro hate. If you build Perl from source, then yes it is reasonable for CPAN.pm to ask a bunch of questions. But if you're installing a package, then your vendor should know a set of reasonable defaults to supply and should damn well supply it. The only thing that's not reasonable for the vendor to pick is your mirror, but *that* is something I think CPAN.pm could figure out for you without forcing you to pick. There are enough GeoIP services around that it could pick a few mirrors automatically and then just wait for you to rubberstamp the list. If you install a vendor-packaged Perl, CPAN shouldn't have any other questions to ask than "is this list of mirrors OK?" Regards,
From: Robert Rothenberg Date: 20:37 on 05 May 2007 Subject: Distro hate (was Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways...) On 05/05/07 07:53 A. Pagaltzis wrote: > I consider that a distro hate. If you build Perl from source, > then yes it is reasonable for CPAN.pm to ask a bunch of > questions. But if you're installing a package, then your vendor > should know a set of reasonable defaults to supply and should > damn well supply it. Some distros have a hard time with you installing by compiling from the source. Actually, they work fine until there's an update or upgrade. Then it gets confused by a newer version of some program (it could be something as minor as an unusual LaTeX style or newer version of Rhythmbox) that the upgrade halts, leaving your system in a wonderfully unstable state that requires you to do a fresh install anyway.
From: Peter da Silva Date: 23:20 on 05 May 2007 Subject: Re: Distro hate (was Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways...) On May 5, 2007, at 2:37 PM, Robert Rothenberg wrote: > Some distros have a hard time with you installing by compiling from > the > source. Actually, they work fine until there's an update or > upgrade. Then > it gets confused by a newer version of some program (it could be > something > as minor as an unusual LaTeX style or newer version of Rhythmbox) > that the > upgrade halts, leaving your system in a wonderfully unstable state > that > requires you to do a fresh install anyway. This is one of the advantages to the BSD core+ports system and the way it separates the core from add-on packages. It's got its own hatefulness, of course, but I'd rather have some redundant and normally unused stuff in core even with the occasional "which perl am I using anyway".
From: Phil Pennock Date: 01:19 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: Distro hate (was Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways...) On 2007-05-05 at 17:20 -0500, Peter da Silva wrote: > This is one of the advantages to the BSD core+ports system and the way it > separates the core from add-on packages. It's got its own hatefulness, of > course, but I'd rather have some redundant and normally unused stuff in core > even with the occasional "which perl am I using anyway". As regards Perl, I'm happy with the way that FreeBSD 6 moved Perl out of core. Sure, if you install X11 from the CD then the package dependency pushes Perl 5.6 on you, but if you pkg_add later, or are doing a server, then you have the freedom to just install Perl 5.8 in the first place and avoid the entire issue. Now, if there were a completely clean way to do the same for library packages which exist in both core and ports. For OpenSSH, NO_OPENSSH in /etc/make.conf and WITH_OVERRITE_BASE works just fine. But when you start to deal with OpenSSL or Heimdal, you're facing issues with a lack of distinction between "don't make and install this when you make world" and "don't allow dependencies upon this". Especially with some of the header file changes in Heimdal which affect the ability of core to build if you're trying to use Ports; if you try to keep both core and ports Heimdals around then you'll have fun debugging cases where Ports software can't handle the two distinct sets of libraries and headers and the Port maintainer can't do much about it without more cooperation from upstream. I've yet to find a system which makes me _happy_ about its package management, only those which provide the least pain and suffering. And no, MacOS doesn't cut it -- those Spotlight extensions can't be installed by drag+drop "everything in a folder under /Applications/" and then finding out that there are apparently no manifests to allow deletion of .mpkg stuff. Hello, if I wanted to manually chase down cruft left over from installs then I'd be running Windows. At least the installer doesn't mean directly running executables as a privileged user. Except when it does, because there are checker scripts. My memory is trying to convince me that the Amiga Installer was less painful in every regard, but I'm sure it's lying to me since I only dealt with it as a user back then. -Phil
From: Tony Finch Date: 18:06 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: Distro hate (was Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways...) On Sat, 5 May 2007, Phil Pennock wrote: > > I've yet to find a system which makes me _happy_ about its package > management, only those which provide the least pain and suffering. I need to read more about Nix <http://nix.cs.uu.nl/>; which claims to be a "purely functional" package manager. The thing that interests me about it is that it allows installations of different versions and configurations of the same software on the same system, which makes rolling back an upgrade MUCH easier. Tony.
From: Tony Finch Date: 18:02 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: Distro hate (was Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways...) On Sat, 5 May 2007, Robert Rothenberg wrote: > > Some distros have a hard time with you installing by compiling from the > source. Obviously the distro should hook into CPAN so that when you install a module it gets automatically turned into a package that can be managed via the usual deinstall/upgrade/etc. processes. Tony.
From: Robert Rothenberg Date: 19:56 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: Distro hate (was Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways...) On 06/05/07 18:02 Tony Finch wrote: > On Sat, 5 May 2007, Robert Rothenberg wrote: >> Some distros have a hard time with you installing by compiling from the >> source. > > Obviously the distro should hook into CPAN so that when you install a > module it gets automatically turned into a package that can be managed via > the usual deinstall/upgrade/etc. processes. In theory packages built using the standard configure scripts or with specialised package managers like cpan can be made to register themselves with whatever official package management system your system is using. But managing conflicts will lead to all sorts of hate. Imagine if the package manager wants to upgrade to the latest version from the distribution, which is a downgrade to what you've installed.... No, package managers need a way to query the version of what is installed (and where), rather than what is registered in their systems.
From: A. Pagaltzis Date: 20:31 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: Distro hate (was Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways...) * Robert Rothenberg <robrwo@xxxxx.xxx> [2007-05-06 21:00]: > No, package managers need a way to query the version of what is > installed (and where), rather than what is registered in their > systems. I think the FreeBSD ports work that way, no? Regards,
From: Phil Pennock Date: 22:08 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: Distro hate (was Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways...) On 2007-05-06 at 18:02 +0100, Tony Finch wrote: > Obviously the distro should hook into CPAN so that when you install a > module it gets automatically turned into a package that can be managed via > the usual deinstall/upgrade/etc. processes. % pkg_info -xI bsdpan bsdpan-CPAN-1.9101 CPAN - query, download and build perl modules from CPAN sit bsdpan-Internals-1.1 Internals - Write-protect variables, manipulate refcounts bsdpan-Set-IntRange-5.1 Set::IntRange - Sets of Integers bsdpan-Tie-Hash-Approx-0.03 Tie::Hash::Approx - Approximative match of hash keys using bsdpan-Tie-Hash-Regex-1.00 Tie::Hash::Regex - Match hash keys using Regular Expression
From: Tony Finch Date: 23:03 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: Distro hate (was Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways...) On Sun, 6 May 2007, Phil Pennock wrote: > > % pkg_info -xI bsdpan Obviously I knew about that :-) Tony.
From: Phil Pennock Date: 00:41 on 07 May 2007 Subject: Re: Distro hate (was Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways...) On 2007-05-06 at 23:03 +0100, Tony Finch wrote: > On Sun, 6 May 2007, Phil Pennock wrote: > > % pkg_info -xI bsdpan > > Obviously I knew about that :-) Heh. :-D Okay, I'm wondering why, on hates-software, I defended the software by stripping a line of output. More accurately, the first two lines of output are: bsdpan-CPAN-1.8802 CPAN - query, download and build perl modules from CPAN sit bsdpan-CPAN-1.9101 CPAN - query, download and build perl modules from CPAN sit Now, I could pkg_delete the first, but any files unmodified in the second could be an issue. Next time I'm farting around with updates, I'll pkg up the second, delete them both and reinstall the second. *sigh* -Phil
From: Zach White Date: 22:25 on 05 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 08:53:19AM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > I consider that a distro hate. If you build Perl from source, > then yes it is reasonable for CPAN.pm to ask a bunch of > questions. But if you're installing a package, then your vendor > should know a set of reasonable defaults to supply and should > damn well supply it. Are there any OSs that actually do that? I can tell you that OpenBSD, Slackware and OSX don't. And what's with perl retrying the same URL with every method it has available when it gets a 404? LWP returns a 404, so it tries to use lynx to fetch the same http url. Uh, hello? -Zach
From: A. Pagaltzis Date: 00:54 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... * Zach White <zwhite-hates-software@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx> [2007-05-05 23:30]: > On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 08:53:19AM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > > I consider that a distro hate. If you build Perl from source, > > then yes it is reasonable for CPAN.pm to ask a bunch of > > questions. But if you're installing a package, then your > > vendor should know a set of reasonable defaults to supply and > > should damn well supply it. > > Are there any OSs that actually do that? I can tell you that > OpenBSD, Slackware and OSX don't. No, there aren't any. *All* OSs are hateful in this regard. Surprised? But, that's how it should be. Maybe if Perl's configure script included options to preconfigure CPAN.pm, the vendors would finally wake up and smell the coffee? > And what's with perl retrying the same URL with every method it > has available when it gets a 404? LWP returns a 404, so it > tries to use lynx to fetch the same http url. Uh, hello? How cute. I could understand if it did that only when external tools like lynx failed, because it's not easy for an HTTP downloader to communicate the HTTP status to its parent... but with LWP there's no excuse. Regards,
From: Gerry Lawrence Date: 01:07 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... ------=_Part_43966_33060706.1178410075644 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On 5/5/07, A. Pagaltzis <pagaltzis@xxx.xx> wrote: > > * Zach White <zwhite-hates-software@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx> [2007-05-05 23:30]: > > On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 08:53:19AM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > > > I consider that a distro hate. If you build Perl from source, > > > then yes it is reasonable for CPAN.pm to ask a bunch of > > > questions. But if you're installing a package, then your > > > vendor should know a set of reasonable defaults to supply and > > > should damn well supply it. > > > > Are there any OSs that actually do that? I can tell you that > > OpenBSD, Slackware and OSX don't. > > No, there aren't any. *All* OSs are hateful in this regard. > > Surprised? Um, I'm going to say that FreeBSD is the lone, shining example of "love" not "hate" in this particular regard. But, that's how it should be. > > Maybe if Perl's configure script included options to preconfigure > CPAN.pm, the vendors would finally wake up and smell the coffee? > > > And what's with perl retrying the same URL with every method it > > has available when it gets a 404? LWP returns a 404, so it > > tries to use lynx to fetch the same http url. Uh, hello? > > How cute. I could understand if it did that only when external > tools like lynx failed, because it's not easy for an HTTP > downloader to communicate the HTTP status to its parent... but > with LWP there's no excuse. > > Regards, > -- > Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>; > >
From: demerphq Date: 10:10 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... On 5/6/07, A. Pagaltzis <pagaltzis@xxx.xx> wrote: > * Zach White <zwhite-hates-software@xxxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx> [2007-05-05 23:30]: > > On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 08:53:19AM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > > > I consider that a distro hate. If you build Perl from source, > > > then yes it is reasonable for CPAN.pm to ask a bunch of > > > questions. But if you're installing a package, then your > > > vendor should know a set of reasonable defaults to supply and > > > should damn well supply it. > > > > Are there any OSs that actually do that? I can tell you that > > OpenBSD, Slackware and OSX don't. > > No, there aren't any. *All* OSs are hateful in this regard. Not true actually, CPAN as bundled with ActiveStates installs is preconfigured these days afair. Actually i find it a little annoying as it assumes i dont have things I do have. Avoiding this problem is the reason why we have config in CPAN, and why IMO the original hate in this thread was not really all that hateful. I mean would the OP like to use my CPAN config file? I bet not. :-) Yves
From: A. Pagaltzis Date: 10:40 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... * demerphq <demerphq@xxxxx.xxx> [2007-05-06 11:15]: > CPAN as bundled with ActiveStates installs is preconfigured > these days afair. Actually i find it a little annoying as it > assumes i dont have things I do have. Avoiding this problem Why is that a problem? You can still configure CPAN.pm manually, can you not? > is the reason why we have config in CPAN, and why IMO the > original hate in this thread was not really all that hateful. But that Windows is also Windows. Most Unixen have marginally more intelligent software installation paradigms, so in theory it should be possible for the Perl package to update the CPAN.pm config when you install `wget`, say. The new event/trigger stuff in APT should be able to solve this nicely, f.ex. Regards,
From: demerphq Date: 17:46 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... On 5/6/07, A. Pagaltzis <pagaltzis@xxx.xx> wrote: > * demerphq <demerphq@xxxxx.xxx> [2007-05-06 11:15]: > > CPAN as bundled with ActiveStates installs is preconfigured > > these days afair. Actually i find it a little annoying as it > > assumes i dont have things I do have. Avoiding this problem > > Why is that a problem? You can still configure CPAN.pm manually, > can you not? Yes of course, but it reflects on the original point as id prefer on first use to be asked to go through configuration than to have the precanned settings. > > is the reason why we have config in CPAN, and why IMO the > > original hate in this thread was not really all that hateful. > > But that Windows is also Windows. Right, which is part of my point. CPAN/Perl runs on so many configurations and platforms that if *it* came with a precanned config it would be wrong an awful lot of the time. The OP made it sound like the only OS out there was *NIX. > Most Unixen have marginally > more intelligent software installation paradigms, so in theory > it should be possible for the Perl package to update the CPAN.pm > config when you install `wget`, say. The new event/trigger stuff > in APT should be able to solve this nicely, f.ex. Im surprised someone hasnt come up with a script to autoconfigure CPAN intelligently under these conditions. Yves
From: A. Pagaltzis Date: 20:29 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... * demerphq <demerphq@xxxxx.xxx> [2007-05-06 18:55]: > CPAN/Perl runs on so many configurations and platforms that if > *it* came with a precanned config it would be wrong an awful > lot of the time. The OP made it sound like the only OS out > there was *NIX. I did say that when you install Perl from source, then it is entirely reasonable for CPAN.pm to ask a bunch of questions. When you install a binary package, though, it seems reasonable that the packager would have enough info to provide at least a minimal canned CPAN.pm config, the exception being which mirror to use. Regards,
From: Hakim Cassimally Date: 12:12 on 07 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... shouldn't we be pointing at http://www.cpan.org and let the cpan multiplexer pass us to an appropriate mirror anyway? That would be a sensible default, and if your site wants to use a specific or a local mirror, you can always reconfigure later. osfameron On 06/05/07, A. Pagaltzis <pagaltzis@xxx.xx> wrote: > * demerphq <demerphq@xxxxx.xxx> [2007-05-06 18:55]: > > CPAN/Perl runs on so many configurations and platforms that if > > *it* came with a precanned config it would be wrong an awful > > lot of the time. The OP made it sound like the only OS out > > there was *NIX. > > I did say that when you install Perl from source, then it is > entirely reasonable for CPAN.pm to ask a bunch of questions. When > you install a binary package, though, it seems reasonable that > the packager would have enough info to provide at least a minimal > canned CPAN.pm config, the exception being which mirror to use. > > Regards, > -- > Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>; > >
From: A. Pagaltzis Date: 12:37 on 07 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... * Hakim Cassimally <hakim.cassimally@xxxxx.xxx> [2007-05-07 13:20]: > shouldn't we be pointing at http://www.cpan.org and let the > cpan multiplexer pass us to an appropriate mirror anyway? That > would be a sensible default, and if your site wants to use a > specific or a local mirror, you can always reconfigure later. That might work. The days when a few 100 KB were a respectable download are long behind us. The mirror network is more important as a provider of redundancy than bandwidth, these days. I think. Regards,
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ask_Bj=F8rn_Hansen?= Date: 13:15 on 07 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... On May 7, 2007, at 4:12 AM, Hakim Cassimally wrote: > shouldn't we be pointing at http://www.cpan.org and let the cpan > multiplexer > pass us to an appropriate mirror anyway? There's no CPAN multiplexer at www.cpan.org. - ask
From: Philip Newton Date: 13:18 on 07 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... On 5/7/07, Ask Bj=F8rn Hansen <ask@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote: > > On May 7, 2007, at 4:12 AM, Hakim Cassimally wrote: > > > shouldn't we be pointing at http://www.cpan.org and let the cpan > > multiplexer > > pass us to an appropriate mirror anyway? > > There's no CPAN multiplexer at www.cpan.org. Hm, where did it use to be? Was it something like http://www.perl.com/CPAN/ as the main site and http://www.perl.com/CPAN (not trailing slash) as the multiplexer? Cheers, --=20 Philip Newton <philip.newton@xxxxx.xxx>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ask_Bj=F8rn_Hansen?= Date: 13:38 on 07 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... On May 7, 2007, at 5:18 AM, Philip Newton wrote: > Hm, where did it use to be? Was it something like > http://www.perl.com/CPAN/ as the main site and > http://www.perl.com/CPAN (not trailing slash) as the multiplexer? Yup.
From: Robert Spier Date: 21:34 on 08 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... You mean, how it currently points at ftp.cpan.org, which is multiplexed, doesn't do enough for you? Do your homework. -R (wetware hater) At Mon, 7 May 2007 13:12:35 +0200, Hakim Cassimally wrote: > > shouldn't we be pointing at http://www.cpan.org and let the cpan multiplexer > pass us to an appropriate mirror anyway? That would be a sensible default, > and if your site wants to use a specific or a local mirror, you can always > reconfigure later. > > osfameron > > On 06/05/07, A. Pagaltzis <pagaltzis@xxx.xx> wrote: > > * demerphq <demerphq@xxxxx.xxx> [2007-05-06 18:55]: > > > CPAN/Perl runs on so many configurations and platforms that if > > > *it* came with a precanned config it would be wrong an awful > > > lot of the time. The OP made it sound like the only OS out > > > there was *NIX. > > > > I did say that when you install Perl from source, then it is > > entirely reasonable for CPAN.pm to ask a bunch of questions. When > > you install a binary package, though, it seems reasonable that > > the packager would have enough info to provide at least a minimal > > canned CPAN.pm config, the exception being which mirror to use. > > > > Regards, > > -- > > Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>; > > > >
From: Yoz Grahame Date: 17:37 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... On 5/6/07, demerphq <demerphq@xxxxx.xxx> wrote: > > Not true actually, CPAN as bundled with ActiveStates installs is > preconfigured these days afair. Alas, it doesn't, because ppm != CPAN. ppm (AS's Perl Package Manager) has the approach of "just grab a precompiled tarball from AS's own servers", which works 80% of the time - until you hit a 5-year-old module (hello, DBD::Interbase) that AS still doesn't have a compiled version of. Then you need to go rooting around finding other PPM repositories that have the precompiled binary, which leads into rich new veins of meaty, nutritious hate. -- Yoz
From: Abigail Date: 11:03 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... --zGQnqpIoxlsbsOfg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 03:08:34AM +0000, Zach White wrote: > So I'm installing RT because we need some sort of ticketing system at wor= k.=20 > I build a box, install everything I can from packages and check to see wh= at > has to get installed by hand. Only 4 perl modules missing, not too shabby. >=20 > So I run "make fixdeps" which supposedly uses CPAN to install what's=20 > missing. Mistake number 1. >=20 > Install module Date::Format > You didn't configure CPAN shell yet. > Please run `/usr/bin/perl -MCPAN -e shell` tool and configure it. > *** Error code 1 >=20 > I guess including a set of sensible defaults for CPAN is out of the=20 > question. >=20 > Ok, so I run that, it asks if I'm ready for manual configuration. Knowing > I'll just end up hitting enter a bunch I decide to let it pick defaults > which should be sensible. Mistake number 2. >=20 > CPAN: Storable loaded ok > CPAN: LWP::UserAgent loaded ok > Fetching with LWP: > ftp://ftp.perl.org/pub/CPAN/authors/01mailrc.txt.gz > LWP failed with code[400] message[FTP return code 150] > Fetching with Net::FTP: > ftp://ftp.perl.org/pub/CPAN/authors/01mailrc.txt.gz > Couldn't fetch 01mailrc.txt.gz from ftp.perl.org >=20 > No matter what it does CPAN can't seem to fetch that URL. I can fetch that > URL with curl. I can fetch it with FTP. I can fetch it with lynx. Why can= 't=20 > perl fetch it? Even with lynx -dump? >=20 > So, maybe I shouldn't have gone with the defaults. I find a friend who > actually uses the collection of bugs known as perl and ask him how I > redo the cpan config.=20 >=20 > A bunch of enter pressing later followed by picking a couple sites and I'= ve=20 > configured it. >=20 > Is it really so hard to include a sane set of defaults with CPAN? Why must > I go through these acrobatics? In 2007 do we really need to make each and > every person who uses perl set paths to programs that are standard and > located in the path? Is it part of some conspiracy to wear out my enter > key? How many questions can a(n) (in)sane person put in one paragraph? You left something out. CPAN gets updated a lot. And every time you use it, it checks whether it has been updated. If it has detected this, it tries to lure you into upgrading to it, promising the upgrade will be=20 "seamless". Don't believe that lie. Most of the times, such an upgrade will mean it forces you throught the manual configuration process again. I've stopped upgrading my CPAN.pm for a long time for no other reason that= =20 this. Abigail --zGQnqpIoxlsbsOfg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGPafUBOh7Ggo6rasRAvgCAJ9LAUWrwg6LYqXvabbWEEtSN4iGRwCeOoRO 3TO36bDD/IENoiapSmSPYKk= =haRe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --zGQnqpIoxlsbsOfg--
From: A. Pagaltzis Date: 11:17 on 06 May 2007 Subject: Re: How do I hate CPAN, let me count the ways... * Abigail <abigail@xxxxxxx.xx> [2007-05-06 12:10]: > CPAN gets updated a lot. And every time you use it, it checks > whether it has been updated. If it has detected this, it tries > to lure you into upgrading to it, promising the upgrade will be > "seamless". Don't believe that lie. Most of the times, such an > upgrade will mean it forces you throught the manual > configuration process again. Interesting. In my case, it only asks me about settings that have been added in the new version, similar to Linux' `make oldconfig`. Regards,
Generated at 10:27 on 16 Apr 2008 by mariachi