develooper Front page | perl.par | Postings from June 2008

Re: PAR installation question....

From:
bob davis
Date:
June 29, 2008 16:44
Subject:
Re: PAR installation question....
Message ID:
48681E3C.6010707@bobsbits.net
Actually to stir up this conversation a little more....

I actually like cygwin better.
alarm works
signals work
chmod works sort of like you expect.
fork works better?

The only reason I went to strawberry over cygwin was because par 
packages it as one exe where with cygwin you need cygwin1.dll etc. Also 
embedding file version and icon were a plus with strawberry.

Mark Dootson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can you name any module that will compile on Strawberry Perl via the 
> CPAN shell that won't compile on ActivePerl via the CPAN shell?
>
> Regards
>
> Mark
>
>
> Packy Anderson wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 29, 2008, at 8:23 AM, Paul Miller wrote:
>>> Why is everyone so down on Active Perl lately?
>>
>>
>> I was just at YAPC::NA two weeks ago, and Adam Kennedy was talking 
>> about the status of Strawberry Perl and how it differs from 
>> ActiveState.  He went into great detail about the differences between 
>> the two--details I can't recall all of so I can't go into here--but 
>> (for me) it boils down to one major thing: CPAN support.
>>
>> There are certain modules in the PPM repository that ActiveState 
>> cannot, for contractual support reasons, update because they would 
>> break installations they have support contract with.  There are other 
>> modules that don't build cleanly, but ActiveState marks them as valid 
>> and delivers them anyway.  Just take a look at the PPM Repository 
>> Build Status page for 5.8:
>>
>> http://ppm.activestate.com/BuildStatus/5.8.html
>>
>> ActiveState was a good tool at the time it came out, when there 
>> wasn't an easily available, open source C compiler for Win32.  Now 
>> that MinGW is available, ActiveState Perl is being surpassed by 
>> Strawberry Perl.  Does that mean that NOBODY should use ActiveState?  
>> No, clearly not.  If all you need is the core modules or modules that 
>> *do* build cleanly for the PPM, then there's no reason for you to go 
>> out and get Strawberry Perl.  Similarly, there are people who use the 
>> ancient version of Perl that ships with Solaris, too, because that's 
>> all they need.
>>
>> If, however, you want to be able to update to the most recent version 
>> of any CPAN module you want and you wouldn't mind using the 
>> incredibly simple cpan shell to do it, then Strawberry's your Perl.
>>
>> -packy
>>
>> -- 
>> Packy Anderson                                              
>> packy@dardan.com
>>
>> I'd be dead by 33; well, that was my best guess...
>> but, hey, here I am this morning.
>> Singing 'Happy Birthday to Me' as I clean up all this mess,
>> 'Cause I'm left still alive without warning.
>> In the big boring middle of my long book of life,
>> after the twist has been told,
>> if you don't die in glory at the age of Christ
>> then your story is just getting old...
>>
>>
>



nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About