BLOCKER: Dist::Zilla::Plugin::MakeMaker gets Perl minimum version wrong about dist-zilla HOT 8 CLOSED

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 12:29:48AM -0800, Ovid wrote:

Loving Dist::Zilla so far, but I've hit a critical blocker. I'm sure it's me just not reading the right docs, but is there any workaround I can use to get my generated Makefile.PL to assert the correct minimum version of Perl?

In my dist.ini, I have the following:

[Prereqs]
perl = 5.010

That wrote the following in my Makefile.PL:

"PREREQ_PM" => {
      "Perl" => "5.010"
 },

That led to the following bug report: https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=83563

In short, perldoc ExtUtils::MakeMaker says this is how you assert the minimum Perl version:

MIN_PERL_VERSION
The minimum required version of Perl for this distribution.

Either 5.006001 or 5.6.1 format is acceptable.

So far all workarounds I've tried have failed, including using MinimumPerl, which swears that I need Perl 5.12.0, even though perlver --blame on all files reveals 5.10.0 to be the highest version needed.

I would like to avoid AutoPrereqs yet because it's missed some prereqs at work (I cannot replicate the use case).

Are you sure that's what you specified? I only get a "Perl" key in
PREREQ_PM if I actually list "Perl" (rather than "perl") as a
dependency. Listing "perl = 5.010" in the Prereqs list doesn't add
anything at all to the WriteMakefile args, it just adds a "use 5.010" to
the top of the Makefile.PL. I'm not sure what might be happening in your
case.

-doy

from dist-zilla.

Ack, sorry about that. I has "Perl", not "perl". The above was a typo.

As far as I can tell, ExtUtils::MakeMaker doesn't recognize a Perl key in PREREQ_PM. However, now that I see the perl (lower-case) key adds that use 5.010 at the top of the Makefile.PL, I think that will be good enough for me for now. Thanks!

Cheers,
Ovid

from dist-zilla.

the use 5.010 is cool but what about the following NA report:
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/0334230c-7ff4-11e2-ae72-6e2643cbaa99

Is that the correct approach or simply adding perl to PREREQ_PM?

from dist-zilla.

I think I'm OK with N/A reports. I'd rather not have the code even tested on unsupported systems, but N/A is better than a failure.
 
Cheers,

Ovid

Twitter - http://twitter.com/OvidPerl/
Buy my book - http://bit.ly/beginning_perl
Buy my other book - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/
Live and work overseas - http://www.overseas-exile.com/

---

From: Ahmad M. Zawawi [email protected]
To: rjbs/dist-zilla [email protected]
Cc: Ovid [email protected]
Sent: Friday, 1 March 2013, 7:15
Subject: Re: [dist-zilla] BLOCKER: Dist::Zilla::Plugin::MakeMaker gets Perl minimum version wrong (#148)

the use 5.010 is cool but what about the following NA report:
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/0334230c-7ff4-11e2-ae72-6e2643cbaa99
Is that the correct approach or simply adding perl to PREREQ_PM?
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

from dist-zilla.

I'm not sure what the proposed change would do, in practice. That is: in what way is it better than "use 5.10.0;" and why?

from dist-zilla.

I am OK also with N/A reports. Thanks 👍

from dist-zilla.

Where's this at? Is there still a blocker? Is there anything to be done at all?

from dist-zilla.

I am closing this ticket due to lack of response. I think it's okay to be closed anyway. :)

from dist-zilla.