[gentoo-dev] RFC: Perl CPAN.pm and portage (Bug 551 or "Can't we all get along?")

[gentoo-dev] RFC: Perl CPAN.pm and portage (Bug 551 or "Can't we all get along?")

[Tod M. Neidt]

Hi!

Was looking at Bug 551 ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=551 )
this morning.  I believe this particular error was generated because the
user was downloading and install additional perl modules using the
CPAN.pm module that comes with the perl-5.6.1 package, but didn't have
the required perl module dependency libnet installed prior to installing
the telnet module.  Info on the CPAN.pm module can be found at
http://theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca/CPAN/perl/CPAN.html

Note: I successfully merged the dev-perl/Net-Telnet ebuild using portage
and the dev-perl/libnet ebuild was merged first like it is supposed to
so this really isn't a portage or ebuild issue.

However, this situation does bring up an interesting question regarding
a possible enhancement.

Would it be possible (or even desirable) to hack CPAN.pm and/or portage
so that they play nice together, i.e. a user could find and download
perl modules using CPAN.pm and portage would provide the installation
and package management?


Some Advantages:

1. Useful feature for Gentoo users accustomed to enhancing perl with
modules through the CPAN.pm module.

2. Possibility to effectively eleminate the dev-perl portage category,
while at the same time, (less burden on Gentoo.org servers, and perl
module ebuild maintainers) 

3. providing *all* the perl modules archived at cpan (the archive) to
Gentoo users.

4. Cool hack :)


Some Disadvantages:

1. Extra work maintaining a CPAN.pm-gentoo.diff

2. perl <--> python interface might be difficult?

3. package management accounting if both perl module ebuilds and CPAN.pm
installations are tracked in /var/db/pkg/

As I am not worthy to wash the feet of a perl deity, I am interested in
the thoughts of those who are.

tod

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Perl CPAN.pm and portage (Bug 551 or "Can't we all get along?")

[JR Boyens]

Sounds interesting, if your willing to help with an implementation I
would suppose that we could get something together. Let me know on or
off the list and we'll set something up.

Anyone else interested?

--
JR Boyens
jboyens@iastate.edu

On Wed, 2002-02-06 at 09:55, Tod M. Neidt wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Was looking at Bug 551 ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=551 )
> this morning.  I believe this particular error was generated because the
> user was downloading and install additional perl modules using the
> CPAN.pm module that comes with the perl-5.6.1 package, but didn't have
> the required perl module dependency libnet installed prior to installing
> the telnet module.  Info on the CPAN.pm module can be found at
> http://theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca/CPAN/perl/CPAN.html
> 
> Note: I successfully merged the dev-perl/Net-Telnet ebuild using portage
> and the dev-perl/libnet ebuild was merged first like it is supposed to
> so this really isn't a portage or ebuild issue.
> 
> However, this situation does bring up an interesting question regarding
> a possible enhancement.
> 
> Would it be possible (or even desirable) to hack CPAN.pm and/or portage
> so that they play nice together, i.e. a user could find and download
> perl modules using CPAN.pm and portage would provide the installation
> and package management?
> 
> 
> Some Advantages:
> 
> 1. Useful feature for Gentoo users accustomed to enhancing perl with
> modules through the CPAN.pm module.
> 
> 2. Possibility to effectively eleminate the dev-perl portage category,
> while at the same time, (less burden on Gentoo.org servers, and perl
> module ebuild maintainers) 
> 
> 3. providing *all* the perl modules archived at cpan (the archive) to
> Gentoo users.
> 
> 4. Cool hack :)
> 
> 
> Some Disadvantages:
> 
> 1. Extra work maintaining a CPAN.pm-gentoo.diff
> 
> 2. perl <--> python interface might be difficult?
> 
> 3. package management accounting if both perl module ebuilds and CPAN.pm
> installations are tracked in /var/db/pkg/
> 
> As I am not worthy to wash the feet of a perl deity, I am interested in
> the thoughts of those who are.
> 
> tod
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> 

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Perl CPAN.pm and portage (Bug 551 or "Can't we all get along?")

[Patrick Flaherty]

I'd be interested in at least monitoring the progess of devlopment. I'd
love to help out but i'm not sure how much time i have for it, buy hey
i'll probly get sucked in after a few emails -=] 

--
pack

On Wed, 2002-02-06 at 11:05, JR Boyens wrote:
> Sounds interesting, if your willing to help with an implementation I
> would suppose that we could get something together. Let me know on or
> off the list and we'll set something up.
> 
> Anyone else interested?
> 
> --
> JR Boyens
> jboyens@iastate.edu
> 
> On Wed, 2002-02-06 at 09:55, Tod M. Neidt wrote:
> > Hi!
> > 
> > Was looking at Bug 551 ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=551 )
> > this morning.  I believe this particular error was generated because the
> > user was downloading and install additional perl modules using the
> > CPAN.pm module that comes with the perl-5.6.1 package, but didn't have
> > the required perl module dependency libnet installed prior to installing
> > the telnet module.  Info on the CPAN.pm module can be found at
> > http://theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca/CPAN/perl/CPAN.html
> > 
> > Note: I successfully merged the dev-perl/Net-Telnet ebuild using portage
> > and the dev-perl/libnet ebuild was merged first like it is supposed to
> > so this really isn't a portage or ebuild issue.
> > 
> > However, this situation does bring up an interesting question regarding
> > a possible enhancement.
> > 
> > Would it be possible (or even desirable) to hack CPAN.pm and/or portage
> > so that they play nice together, i.e. a user could find and download
> > perl modules using CPAN.pm and portage would provide the installation
> > and package management?
> > 
> > 
> > Some Advantages:
> > 
> > 1. Useful feature for Gentoo users accustomed to enhancing perl with
> > modules through the CPAN.pm module.
> > 
> > 2. Possibility to effectively eleminate the dev-perl portage category,
> > while at the same time, (less burden on Gentoo.org servers, and perl
> > module ebuild maintainers) 
> > 
> > 3. providing *all* the perl modules archived at cpan (the archive) to
> > Gentoo users.
> > 
> > 4. Cool hack :)
> > 
> > 
> > Some Disadvantages:
> > 
> > 1. Extra work maintaining a CPAN.pm-gentoo.diff
> > 
> > 2. perl <--> python interface might be difficult?
> > 
> > 3. package management accounting if both perl module ebuilds and CPAN.pm
> > installations are tracked in /var/db/pkg/
> > 
> > As I am not worthy to wash the feet of a perl deity, I am interested in
> > the thoughts of those who are.
> > 
> > tod
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Perl CPAN.pm and portage (Bug 551 or "Can't we all get along?")

[JR Boyens]

Currently the best option I'm seeing is to write a ebuild script for
each module you want. Say you want CGI::Bob something like:
	src_compile () { perl -MCPAN -e 'make CGI::Bob' }
	src_install () { perl -MCPAN -e 'install CGI::Bob' }
Unfortuately since there is no tarball for portage to get, we would have
to either fake it out with a 'blank' tarball or change portage's
behavior.

Creating the actual ebuilds are completely easy with a perl script that
whips through CPAN... Hmmm thinking as I write this adding a --perl or
some special dev-perl handling to emerge so that emerge executes the
CPAN install would work even better.....

Any suggestions?
--
JR Boyens
jboyens@iastate.edu

On Thu, 2002-02-07 at 18:23, Patrick Flaherty wrote:
> I'd be interested in at least monitoring the progess of devlopment. I'd
> love to help out but i'm not sure how much time i have for it, buy hey
> i'll probly get sucked in after a few emails -=] 
> 
> --
> pack
> 
> On Wed, 2002-02-06 at 11:05, JR Boyens wrote:
> > Sounds interesting, if your willing to help with an implementation I
> > would suppose that we could get something together. Let me know on or
> > off the list and we'll set something up.
> > 
> > Anyone else interested?
> > 
> > --
> > JR Boyens
> > jboyens@iastate.edu
> > 
> > On Wed, 2002-02-06 at 09:55, Tod M. Neidt wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > > 
> > > Was looking at Bug 551 ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=551 )
> > > this morning.  I believe this particular error was generated because the
> > > user was downloading and install additional perl modules using the
> > > CPAN.pm module that comes with the perl-5.6.1 package, but didn't have
> > > the required perl module dependency libnet installed prior to installing
> > > the telnet module.  Info on the CPAN.pm module can be found at
> > > http://theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca/CPAN/perl/CPAN.html
> > > 
> > > Note: I successfully merged the dev-perl/Net-Telnet ebuild using portage
> > > and the dev-perl/libnet ebuild was merged first like it is supposed to
> > > so this really isn't a portage or ebuild issue.
> > > 
> > > However, this situation does bring up an interesting question regarding
> > > a possible enhancement.
> > > 
> > > Would it be possible (or even desirable) to hack CPAN.pm and/or portage
> > > so that they play nice together, i.e. a user could find and download
> > > perl modules using CPAN.pm and portage would provide the installation
> > > and package management?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Some Advantages:
> > > 
> > > 1. Useful feature for Gentoo users accustomed to enhancing perl with
> > > modules through the CPAN.pm module.
> > > 
> > > 2. Possibility to effectively eleminate the dev-perl portage category,
> > > while at the same time, (less burden on Gentoo.org servers, and perl
> > > module ebuild maintainers) 
> > > 
> > > 3. providing *all* the perl modules archived at cpan (the archive) to
> > > Gentoo users.
> > > 
> > > 4. Cool hack :)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Some Disadvantages:
> > > 
> > > 1. Extra work maintaining a CPAN.pm-gentoo.diff
> > > 
> > > 2. perl <--> python interface might be difficult?
> > > 
> > > 3. package management accounting if both perl module ebuilds and CPAN.pm
> > > installations are tracked in /var/db/pkg/
> > > 
> > > As I am not worthy to wash the feet of a perl deity, I am interested in
> > > the thoughts of those who are.
> > > 
> > > tod
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>