[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2004/11/04]
* On 2004.11.04, in <418A6D99.3030204@xxx.xx>, * "Jarkko Hietaniemi" <jhi@xxx.xx> wrote: > > Of course I'm somewhat biased :-) but I suppose you have *done* > something about the crappy defaults like submitted bug reports/ > code/suggestions to the Perl maintainers. If not, I really > can't bring myself to care... Actually, no (but probably you know that already): for the number of places I actually want to use CPAN.pm it's not worth the time. I don't like to submit bug reports without investigating the bugs and having some information about the problem. And in general I want my software managed as packages, not installed ad hoc as if all my servers were desktops, so I don't use CPAN except in odd one-off circumstances. FWIW, except for this particular problem, I'm not convinced that the problem is necessarily CPAN.pm's. It might just be flaws in the modules' build stages. But CPAN.pm inherits that set of problems, just as much of RPM and fink hell are inherited from their packages. If I had a greater use for it, I'd spend more time on the problem. For now it's faster just to kill the destined-to-fail attempt and let the next one take over. CPAN itself is mostly rather nice, though... when I must use perl, which is altogether too often, I appreciate it. -- -D. dgc@xxxxxxxx.xxx NSIT::ENSS
Generated at 00:02 on 06 Nov 2004 by mariachi 0.52