File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It?
| Author |
Message |
|
Matt Krus
#1 / 25
|
 File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? Can anyone tell me which versions of Perl include File::Copy as part of the
standard distribution?
Do all versions back to 5.001 include it?
Matt Kruse
http://www.*-*-*.com/
|
| Sun, 16 May 2004 03:00:16 GMT |
|
 |
|
Jeff 'japhy' Pinya
#2 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? [posted & mailed]
On Nov 28, Matt Kruse said:
Quote: >Can anyone tell me which versions of Perl include File::Copy as part of the
>standard distribution?
>Do all versions back to 5.001 include it?
It was there BEFORE 5.003:
(from Changes5.003)
- Several changes were made to standard library files:
- reduced use of English.pm and $`, $', and $& in library modules,
since these degrade module loading and evaluation of regular
expressions, respectively.
- File/Basename.pm: Added path separator to dirname('.')
- File/Copy.pm: Added support for VMS and OS/2 system-level copy
- MakeMaker updated to v5.26
- Symbol.pm now accepts old (') and new (::) package delimiters
- Sys/Syslog.pm uses Sys::Hostname only when necessary
- chat2.pl picks up necessary constants from socket.ph
- syslog.pl: Corrected thinko 'Socket' --> 'Syslog'
- xsubpp updated to v1.935
So it was PROBABLY there as of Perl 5.001. It was written in 95/96.
--
RPI Acacia brother #734 http://www.perlmonks.org/ http://www.cpan.org/
** Look for "Regular Expressions in Perl" published by Manning, in 2002 **
|
| Sun, 16 May 2004 03:18:09 GMT |
|
|
|
Matt Krus
#3 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It?
Quote: > It was there BEFORE 5.003:
> So it was PROBABLY there as of Perl 5.001. It was written in 95/96.
Actually, I just found a site which says:
Perl 5.002 Release Notes
...
A number of new standard modules were added, including
File::Copy
Which begs the question... what *is* the correct way to determine which
versions contains which standard modules, and preferrably which versions of
those modules?
When writing portable scripts and the user's environment can vary, it's
dangerous to use 'standard' modules which aren't included in *all* versions
of Perl5, so it would be handy to have a reference.
Matt Kruse
http://www.mattkruse.com/
|
| Sun, 16 May 2004 03:25:14 GMT |
|
|
|
Jeff 'japhy' Pinya
#4 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? [posted & mailed]
On Nov 28, Matt Kruse said:
Quote:
>> It was there BEFORE 5.003: >> So it was PROBABLY there as of Perl 5.001. It was written in 95/96. >Actually, I just found a site which says:
> Perl 5.002 Release Notes
> ...
> A number of new standard modules were added, including
> File::Copy
Grr. I could not find such a statement in Changes5.002. That's
upsetting.
Quote: >When writing portable scripts and the user's environment can vary, it's
>dangerous to use 'standard' modules which aren't included in *all* versions
>of Perl5, so it would be handy to have a reference.
Well, you COULD always do:
use 5.005;
to require the user have at least 5.005 installed. These days, people
should have at least 5.005.
--
RPI Acacia brother #734 http://www.perlmonks.org/ http://www.cpan.org/
** Look for "Regular Expressions in Perl" published by Manning, in 2002 **
|
| Sun, 16 May 2004 03:35:54 GMT |
|
|
|
Matt Krus
#5 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It?
Quote: > Grr. I could not find such a statement in Changes5.002. That's
> upsetting.
Interesting. It's difficult to track down the truth :)
Quote: > Well, you COULD always do:
> use 5.005;
> to require the user have at least 5.005 installed. These days, people
> should have at least 5.005.
Well, that's true, but when writing something for the mass audience, it's
best to not assume anything.
An average Joe web developer who wants a CGI script doesn't necessarily know
much about Perl, much less have control over which version of perl his web
host uses. When something doesn't work because his site doesn't have a
recent version, he gives up and assumes that the script sucks because it
doesn't work.
It's best, IMO, to write portable scripts which don't make many demands
about the environment of the user, so that almost anyone can pick it up and
use it. That's my goal, at least. For the most part, it works well for me :)
Thanks,
Matt Kruse
http://www.mattkruse.com/
|
| Sun, 16 May 2004 16:34:55 GMT |
|
|
|
Helgi Bri
#6 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:34:55 -0600, "Matt Kruse"
Quote:
>An average Joe web developer who wants a CGI script doesn't
>necessarily know much about Perl,
Since when is ignorance an excuse for incompetence?
Quote: >much less have control over which version of perl his web
>host uses.
He should ask the web host to install a newer version,
install it himself or find a new hosting company.
In this age of daily security breaches, there is no
excuse for an ISP to provide outdated and obsolete
tools.
Regards,
Helgi Briem
|
| Sun, 16 May 2004 16:59:12 GMT |
|
|
|
Matt Krus
#7 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? Quote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:34:55 -0600, "Matt Kruse"
> >An average Joe web developer who wants a CGI script doesn't
> >necessarily know much about Perl,
> Since when is ignorance an excuse for incompetence?
If a web developer wants a CGI script to work, and doesn't have the power to
upgrade the version of Perl on his web server, I don't see that as
incompetence. Nor should a web developer be required to have knowledge of
Perl to get a CGI script to function correctly. This is an example of
typical Perl 'elitist' attitude, and I'll have nothing to do with that.
Quote: > >much less have control over which version of perl his web
> >host uses.
> He should ask the web host to install a newer version,
> install it himself or find a new hosting company.
1) He may not even know what Perl is, much less which version he needs or
that the version is even a problem. If a script doesn't work and gives him a
500 Internal Server Error, then to him it just doesn't work.
2) Most people certainly don't have the ability to install Perl themselves.
3) Find a new hosting company? You make it sound like that's something you
do in 15 minutes.
Quote: > In this age of daily security breaches, there is no
> excuse for an ISP to provide outdated and obsolete
> tools.
That's questionable. Not everyone can stay totally up-to-date, and not
everyone has the resources or knowledge to stay current on everything. If
Jim Bob is running his own server setup from RedHat5 or something which
might install an older version of Perl, he may have security holes, but it
may server his purposes just fine. It may even be for an Intranet, or a test
server.
In short, your attitude is what I'm trying to get around.
I work with what people have, not give them a 2-page list of requirements
that they must have before anything will work. Much of my target audience is
people who don't have the knowledge or experience of a Perl programmer or
ISP Admin. They simply want things to work. I provide them with something
that works out-of-the-box with no changes or configuration, and people
appreciate that.
If your audience is die-hard Perl developers, your attitude is fine.
If your audience is the general web-developing public, your attitude will
kill your product very quickly.
Matt Kruse
http://www.mattkruse.com/
|
| Sun, 16 May 2004 17:45:04 GMT |
|
|
|
Brian Duf
#8 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? Many vendors choose to stay with the revision of Perl & other
utilities that ship with the OS, usually for support reasons. Others
see no need to upgrade and risk causing problems or conflicts in
existing code.
Some (non-web) applications still ship with Perl 4, believe it or not.
Brian Duffy
Quote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:34:55 -0600, "Matt Kruse"
> >An average Joe web developer who wants a CGI script doesn't
> >necessarily know much about Perl,
> Since when is ignorance an excuse for incompetence?
> >much less have control over which version of perl his web
> >host uses.
> He should ask the web host to install a newer version,
> install it himself or find a new hosting company.
> In this age of daily security breaches, there is no
> excuse for an ISP to provide outdated and obsolete
> tools.
> Regards,
> Helgi Briem
|
| Sun, 16 May 2004 20:20:30 GMT |
|
|
|
Helgi Bri
#9 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:45:04 -0600, "Matt Kruse"
Quote:
>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:34:55 -0600, "Matt Kruse" >> >An average Joe web developer who wants a CGI script doesn't >> >necessarily know much about Perl, >> Since when is ignorance an excuse for incompetence? >If a web developer wants a CGI script to work, and doesn't have the power to
>upgrade the version of Perl on his web server, I don't see that as
>incompetence.
But he always has that power as long as he has a
home directory and a couple of MB of disk space.
If he doesn't, then what the hell is he doing setting
up a web site for?
Quote: >Nor should a web developer be required to have knowledge of
>Perl to get a CGI script to function correctly.
Why is someone who doesn't know a programming
language attempting to program in it? Would
you let someone drive who didn't have a licence?
Quote: >1) He may not even know what Perl is,
Then what on earth is "he" doing, programming in it?
Would you let a chimp drive a car?
Quote: >3) Find a new hosting company? You make it sound like that's something you
>do in 15 minutes.
Less..
Quote: >> In this age of daily security breaches, there is no >> excuse for an ISP to provide outdated and obsolete >> tools. >That's questionable. Not everyone can stay totally up-to-date,
haven't even been in business that long.
Quote: >I work with what people have, not give them a 2-page list of
>requirements
Give them what they need, on a CD or something and
a little script that installs it. Easy peasy. Even easier,
install everything off the net with Activestate's PPM.
Regards,
Helgi Briem
|
| Mon, 17 May 2004 10:24:33 GMT |
|
|
|
Helgi Bri
#10 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It?
Quote:
>Many vendors choose to stay with the revision of Perl & other >utilities that ship with the OS, usually for support reasons. Others >see no need to upgrade and risk causing problems or conflicts in >existing code. >Some (non-web) applications still ship with Perl 4, believe it or not.
Don't top post.
Ignorance is no excuse for incompetence.
Regards,
Helgi Briem
|
| Mon, 17 May 2004 10:25:25 GMT |
|
|
|
Matt Krus
#11 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? Quote:
> >If a web developer wants a CGI script to work, and doesn't have the power
to
> >upgrade the version of Perl on his web server, I don't see that as
> >incompetence.
> But he always has that power as long as he has a
> home directory and a couple of MB of disk space.
> If he doesn't, then what the hell is he doing setting
> up a web site for?
You seem to have trouble understanding the concept that everyone is not you.
Not everyone has your knowledge, and not everyone shares the same interests.
Most people will have no clue how to install Perl.
The ability to install Perl is not a prerequisite to be a web developer.
Quote: > >Nor should a web developer be required to have knowledge of
> >Perl to get a CGI script to function correctly.
> Why is someone who doesn't know a programming
> language attempting to program in it? Would
> you let someone drive who didn't have a licence?
Did I say they were programming? No. They are simply trying to *USE* a
program.
You do not need to know how to build an operating system to use Windows or
Linux, do you?
Do you need to understand the NNTP protocol to post your messages?
Quote: > >1) He may not even know what Perl is,
> Then what on earth is "he" doing, programming in it?
> Would you let a chimp drive a car?
He's not programming. He's using a program, which happened to have been
written in Perl.
Quote: > >3) Find a new hosting company? You make it sound like that's something
you
> >do in 15 minutes.
> Less..
Umm, yeah. Which fantasy world do you live in, again?
Quote: > >That's questionable. Not everyone can stay totally up-to-date,
> Oh, come on. Perl 5.005 is like 5 years old. Most ISPs
> haven't even been in business that long.
ISP's often have many more concerns than trying to keep up with the latest
version of Perl. If it's not broken, don't fix it.
Obviously, your interest is Perl. I bet I could look at your machine and
find things that are out of date also, but you just don't have an interest
in those things, so it doesn't bother you. Pot. Kettle. Black.
Quote: > >I work with what people have, not give them a 2-page list of
> >requirements
> Give them what they need, on a CD or something and
> a little script that installs it. Easy peasy. Even easier,
> install everything off the net with Activestate's PPM.
Again, you are _WAY_ out of touch with the real world. IMO.
Matt Kruse
http://www.mattkruse.com/
|
| Mon, 17 May 2004 17:31:12 GMT |
|
|
|
Slaven Rezi
#12 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? Quote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:45:04 -0600, "Matt Kruse"
[...]
> >> In this age of daily security breaches, there is no
> >> excuse for an ISP to provide outdated and obsolete
> >> tools.
> >That's questionable. Not everyone can stay totally up-to-date,
> Oh, come on. Perl 5.005 is like 5 years old. Most ISPs
> haven't even been in business that long.
From the Changes file:
| Version 5.005_03 Third maintenance release of 5.005
| ----------------
|
| ____________________________________________________________________________
| [ 3198] By: gbarr on 1999/03/28 22:21:49
Yes, I know, the 5.005 branch is somewhat older. But anyway, one
should not use the first release of a perl version.
Regards,
Slaven
--
babybike - routeplanner for cyclists in Berlin
handheld (e.g. Compaq iPAQ with Linux) version of bbbike
http://bbbike.sourceforge.net
|
| Mon, 17 May 2004 17:15:20 GMT |
|
|
|
Helgi Bri
#13 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? On Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:31:12 -0600, "Matt Kruse"
Quote:
>You seem to have trouble understanding the concept
> that everyone is not you. Not everyone has your knowledge,
> and not everyone shares the same interests.
>Most people will have no clue how to install Perl.
>The ability to install Perl is not a prerequisite to be a
>web developer.
The concept I don't get is that you think its perfectly
OK to do complex technical things without knowing
how. I guess I don't know what a "web developer" is
either. The ones I know who call themselves web
developers are pretty savvy.
As I can see it there are 3 things you can do
and I have suggested all of them:
1) Learn how.
2) Hire someone knowledgable to do it.
3) Get a plug and play system with an
automated install script, don't give the user
hard choices and hope for the best.
Writing things in Perl4 without modules seems to
me just about the stupidest possible solution.
Regards,
Helgi Briem
|
| Mon, 17 May 2004 18:04:11 GMT |
|
|
|
Matt Krus
#14 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? Quote:
> The concept I don't get is that you think its perfectly
> OK to do complex technical things without knowing
> how.
You drive a car, I assume? Do you know how it works?
Do you watch television? Do you understand how it works?
Do you use a telephone? Do you understand how it works?
A person should not need to know how a tool works in order to use it.
True, an understanding of Perl and CGI is preferred. But it shouldn't be a
prerequisite to use a CGI script.
Quote: > I guess I don't know what a "web developer" is
> either. The ones I know who call themselves web
> developers are pretty savvy.
There are millions of people running web sites who aren't programmers. They
know HTML, javascript, etc. They can FTP files, they know how to CHMOD them,
etc. These people are not stupid, they just don't have the same knowledge as
programmers.
They should be able to install a CGI script on their site which will help
them do what they want, without having to learn 5,000 different things.
If the author of the script doesn't want to enable these type of people to
use their program, they are losing a huge potential audience.
Quote: > 3) Get a plug and play system with an
> automated install script, don't give the user
> hard choices and hope for the best.
Actually, my approach is to write scripts which are intelligent enough to
run without any modifications, customizations, or configuration. Just upload
them, CHMOD the files, and run it. Nothing else is needed. This is the
approach which I think works best, and has enabled thousands of people to
use CGI scripts who otherwise wouldn't have been able to figure it out.
Quote: > Writing things in Perl4 without modules seems to
> me just about the stupidest possible solution.
I never mentioned writing in Perl4. That would, obviously, be dumb.
Matt Kruse
http://www.mattkruse.com/
|
| Mon, 17 May 2004 18:41:01 GMT |
|
|
|
Alan J. Flavel
#15 / 25
|
File::Copy - Which Perl Versions Include It? On Nov 29, Matt Kruse inscribed on the eternal scroll:
Quote:
> > If he doesn't, then what the hell is he doing setting > > up a web site for? > You seem to have trouble understanding the concept that everyone is not you.
> Not everyone has your knowledge, and not everyone shares the same interests.
> Most people will have no clue how to install Perl.
A major disease on the WWW is that suddenly every man and his dog
consider themselves to be a "web developer" and thus, automatically
competent to undertake anything at all that is web related, without
the slightest background in problem solving, software design, network
security or anything. Is it any wonder that so much of the WWW just
falls in a crumbling heap when one does more than just glance at it?
Quote: > The ability to install Perl is not a prerequisite to be a web developer.
The ability to RTFM and RTFFAQ seem to be considered optional
nowadays. However, reality checks are in the post...
Quote: > Did I say they were programming? No. They are simply trying to *USE* a
> program.
It's not as easy as that. Even if they're not coding it themselves,
that program needs to be 1. selected from the great scrap-heap of
cargo-cult which is out there, and 2. installed in an appropriate
environment on a web server. One does not arrive to this task
pre-qualified: some kind of preparation/training is appropriate.
[In fact I can't resist commenting that for many straightforward
tasks, it's easier to code it oneself than to debug many of those
cargo-cult things that are offered for the taking.]
Quote: > ISP's often have many more concerns than trying to keep up with the latest
> version of Perl.
...or indeed providing a competent CGI environment. Faced with such
rules of play, it might be advisable to declare the game a draw,
rather than risk injuries by continuing to play.
Quote: > If it's not broken, don't fix it.
The whole point is that it _is_ broken and needs fixing, if it's as
old as you imply.
best regards
|
| Mon, 17 May 2004 18:41:42 GMT |
|
| |
Page 1 of 2
|
[ 25 post ] |
|
Go to page:
[1]
[2] |
|
