[Catalyst] Is it normal to have lots of trouble installing catalyst?

[Perrin Harkins]

On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 08:17 -0500, Joe Landman wrote:
> FWIW: We build a separate tree for our application and load perl and 
> modules there.

This is the best way to do things, in my opinion.  You don't want
whatever the latest version of everything is; you want the specific
version that you verified during QA.  We use a system similar to yours
built with code from the build system for Krang (http://krang.sf.net/).
All dependencies are bundled, including apache, and built at install
time.  Nothing is installed into site_perl.  No network access is
required.  Multiple versions can be installed on the same machine.

> What we did to get it working is hand trace all the dependencies that 
> failed, and integrate that into our build system (one large make file 
> for Modules).

Next time, see if CPAN::Unwind can make this easier for you.  It traces
the dependency tree for modules.

> I am 
> hoping that the dependency chain doesn't keep exploding, as it makes 
> this job harder and harder.

As long as you have an easy way to find the dependencies, adding more
shouldn't be a big deal.  I think that telling people to avoid using
more modules is a step in the wrong direction.  Adding a new module and
it's dependencies can be almost totally automated with tools like
CPAN::Unwind.

- Perrin