[Bioperl-l] version of ExtUtils::Manifest too strict?

[Chris Fields]

Alex,

Not sure why ExtUtils::Manifest can't be bundled as a separate perl  
package alone.  It is part of perl core but it's also available on  
CPAN separately from perl itself:

http://search.cpan.org/~rkobes/ExtUtils-Manifest-1.57/lib/ExtUtils/Manifest.pm

This is the commit message for that BTW.  This allows spaces in file  
names for the MANIFEST.  v1.52 is a bug fix and is required.

http://code.open-bio.org/svnweb/index.cgi/bioperl/revision/?rev=15673

chris

On Nov 4, 2009, at 1:30 AM, Alex Lancaster wrote:

> Does the version of ExtUtils::Manifest really need to be strictly
> greater than or equal to 1.52?
>
> Currently this blocks me updating the Fedora package of BioPerl to
> 1.6.1, because the version of perl that Fedora ships is on 1.51 and
> hence the build fails with:
>
> Checking prerequisites...
> - ERROR: ExtUtils::Manifest (1.51_01) is installed, but we need  
> version >= 1.52
>
> Full logs are here:
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1787483
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1787483&name=build.log
>
> This is true even with the version of Perl in rawhide/F-12 etc.
> (ExtUtils::Manifest is in the base perl package).
>
> If it really is necessary, I would like to be armed with a good  
> argument why this ca
> why it needs to be updated, since the Perl package maintainer would  
> have
> to update the entire Perl package simply to get a more recent  
> version of
> one small subpackage.
>
> Regards,
> Alex
> _______________________________________________
> Bioperl-l mailing list
> Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l