Re: sa v32x + Mail::SPF are installed; Mail::SPF::Query still "required". really, or typo?

[Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>]

snowcrash+sa writes:
> i've sa v32-branch, r560837 installed.
> 
> i have perl 588 + Mail::SPF installed,
> 
> 	module_info Mail::SPF
> 		Name:        Mail::SPF
> 		Version:     v2.005
> 		...
> 
> but NOT Mail::SPF::Query.
> 
> reading @ SA/INSTALL,
> 
>     "Either of Mail::SPF or Mail::SPF::Query can be used but Mail::SPF is
>      preferred as it is the current reference implementation for RFC 4408."
> 
> and comments here,
> 
> 	http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/spf/devel/31745
> 
> i understand that M::S::Q is *no longer* required.
> 
> but, on "--lint", i note,
> 
> 	...
> 	[470] dbg: diag: module installed: Mail::SPF, version v2.005
> 	[470] dbg: diag: module not installed: Mail::SPF::Query ('require' failed)
> 	...
> 
> other than the above mention of "failed", all tests/finishes ok.
> 
> the "'require' failed" originates @
> "./lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Util/DependencyInfo.pm"
> 
>   ...
>   foreach my $moddef (@MODULES, @OPTIONAL_MODULES) {
>     my $module = $moddef->{module};
>     my $modver;
>     if (eval ' require '.$module.'; $modver = $'.$module.'::VERSION; 1;')
>     {
>       $modver ||= '(undef)';
>       $out .= "module installed: $module, version $modver\n";
>     } else {
>       $out .= "module not installed: $module ('require' failed)\n";
>     }
>   ...
> 
> but it' not immediately clear to me if M::S::Q *is* a *required*
> dependency anywhere else ... or just a typo.
> 
> clarification?

it's not a requirement -- but the perl comment used to load the
module is "require".  http://perldoc.perl.org/functions/require.html
upshot: don't worry about it, the documentation is right. ;)

--j.

Re: sa v32x + Mail::SPF are installed; Mail::SPF::Query still "required". really, or typo?

[snowcrash+sa <sc...@gmail.com>]

ah. so 'tis 'just' that "require". gr8.

i've become too attuned to the appearance of "fail" in --lint ouput ...

thanks!