You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by "Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net> on 2005/02/17 00:31:30 UTC
Re: [Bug 4124] New: New spamassassin script doesn't work due to tainting
On Wednesday 16 February 2005 20:35 CET Justin Mason wrote:
> Sidney Markowitz writes:
> > Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> > > We support nmake?
> >
> > That's the Microsoft nmake, not to be confused with any other make
> > program of the same name. It's what is available on Windows. For
> > compatibility we have to put all the fancy logic in the perl of
> > Makefile.PL so the resulting makefile is written to a dumbed down
> > common denominator.
>
> ExtUtils::MakeMaker uses nmake (or make on UNIX platforms).
>
> FWIW, Module::Build eschews using any external "make"-ish tool
> at all, instead going for a Python-ish "write everything
> in native perl" approach.
Which is exactly what I love about M::B. To be portable, the current
Makefile.PL stuff is already implemented in most parts in Perl. Having an
additional (complex) Makefile which is generated just to be able to use
make just doesn't make sense (pun not intended). On top there comes the
fact that EU::MM carries loads and loads of old cruft which is a pain to
support.
Sidney, could you test r154095 on Windows please? And everybody else have a
try please, too. I already tested both variants on my Linux box, but only
with Perl 5.8.4 and EU::MM 6.20.
Thanks,
Malte
--
[SGT] Simon G. Tatham: "How to Report Bugs Effectively"
<http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html>
[ESR] Eric S. Raymond: "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way"
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
Re: [Bug 4124] New: New spamassassin script doesn't work due to tainting
Posted by "Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net>.
On Thursday 17 February 2005 09:30 CET Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> >> I'm -1 on switching M::B until it's standard in our minimum required
> >> version of Perl.
>
> "Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net> writes:
> > Fine, thanks for discussing.
>
> Malte, I really appreciate your work on the Makefile system. My
> concerns about the complicated Makefile code in no way reflect on your
> excellent work. The Makefiles are complicated because of necessity.
That's why I hope (I'm still trying M::B, maybe it sucks too for what we
need) that all that complicated underdocumentated hacks which rely on
EU::MM internals and of which I'm afraid that they will blow up one day
something is fixed in EU::MM can go away. The Makefile.PL hacks were
indeed hard work but I'm the last one who wouldn't like to see it die :)
> However, I am still going to disagree sometimes about how things are
> done and when that happens, it would be nice to do so without hostility.
Sorry, I'm currently a bit in exams stress and just after I sent the mail I
noticed that I could have worded it more carefully.
> To put it another way, I can't recall a -1 ever ending a discussion.
Hm, k, so it seems like we've got a different interpretation of -1. I
remember the -1 as "veto, don't do that". But... ah, hey, I'll have my
last exam on Friday and go for skiing vacation next week, maybe I'm less
grumpy when I'm back :)
> > You have noticed that we already require a version of EU::MM which is
> > not part of our minimum required version of Perl? Sorry but ditching
> > M::B just because it isn't shipped with Perl 5.6.1 is complete
> > nonsense IMO.
>
> We only seem to require 5.45 which is the version that ships with 5.6.1
> by default and it works for me.
Perl 5.6.1 contains 5.45? Cool, I thought it was added for 5.6.2.
But that version does not support the DESTDIR stuff which is why the hacks
for that feature are in the Makefile.PL -- which broke at least once when
something deep inside EU::MM was changed.
Well, let's see after I'm back from vacation, I guess I can think clearer
then.
Cheers,
Malte
--
[SGT] Simon G. Tatham: "How to Report Bugs Effectively"
<http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html>
[ESR] Eric S. Raymond: "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way"
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
Re: [Bug 4124] New: New spamassassin script doesn't work due to tainting
Posted by Daniel Quinlan <qu...@pathname.com>.
Daniel Quinlan wrote:
>> I'm -1 on switching M::B until it's standard in our minimum required
>> version of Perl.
"Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net> writes:
> Fine, thanks for discussing.
Malte, I really appreciate your work on the Makefile system. My
concerns about the complicated Makefile code in no way reflect on your
excellent work. The Makefiles are complicated because of necessity.
However, I am still going to disagree sometimes about how things are
done and when that happens, it would be nice to do so without hostility.
To put it another way, I can't recall a -1 ever ending a discussion.
> You have noticed that we already require a version of EU::MM which is
> not part of our minimum required version of Perl? Sorry but ditching
> M::B just because it isn't shipped with Perl 5.6.1 is complete
> nonsense IMO.
We only seem to require 5.45 which is the version that ships with 5.6.1
by default and it works for me.
Daniel
--
Daniel Quinlan
http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/
Re: [Bug 4124] New: New spamassassin script doesn't work due to tainting
Posted by "Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net>.
On Thursday 17 February 2005 01:41 CET Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> "Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net> writes:
> > Which is exactly what I love about M::B.
>
> I'm -1 on switching M::B until it's standard in our minimum required
> version of Perl.
Fine, thanks for discussing. You have noticed that we already require a
version of EU::MM which is not part of our minimum required version of
Perl? Sorry but ditching M::B just because it isn't shipped with Perl
5.6.1 is complete nonsense IMO.
Malte
--
[SGT] Simon G. Tatham: "How to Report Bugs Effectively"
<http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html>
[ESR] Eric S. Raymond: "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way"
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
Re: [Bug 4124] New: New spamassassin script doesn't work due to tainting
Posted by Daniel Quinlan <qu...@pathname.com>.
"Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net> writes:
> Which is exactly what I love about M::B.
I'm -1 on switching M::B until it's standard in our minimum required
version of Perl.
Daniel
--
Daniel Quinlan
http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/
Re: [Bug 4124] New: New spamassassin script doesn't work due to tainting
Posted by "Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net>.
On Thursday 17 February 2005 03:16 CET Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> > Sidney, could you test r154095 on Windows please?
>
> It works. BTW, my buildbot slaves are running again so you can see
> immediately, e.g.,
>
> http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org:8010/trunk-sidney-win32/builds/51
Ah, cool. The buildbot failure on reqd-modules-only-5.8.1 first made me
think I might have foobared something but seems like thats an svn issue
only.
Cheers,
Malte
--
[SGT] Simon G. Tatham: "How to Report Bugs Effectively"
<http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html>
[ESR] Eric S. Raymond: "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way"
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
Re: [Bug 4124] New: New spamassassin script doesn't work due to tainting
Posted by Sidney Markowitz <si...@sidney.com>.
Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> Sidney, could you test r154095 on Windows please?
It works. BTW, my buildbot slaves are running again so you can see
immediately, e.g.,
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org:8010/trunk-sidney-win32/builds/51
-- sidney