[Bioperl-l] Distribution files, versions

Sendu Bala bix at sendu.me.uk
Fri Nov 10 11:03:04 EST 2006

Mauricio Herrera Cuadra wrote:
> Sendu Bala wrote:
>> Does anyone know what the following files are supposed to do and if 
>> they still used/needed?
>> bioperl.lisp
> This a module template for Emacs users.

I propose moving it to the wiki and removing it from CVS.

>> maintenance/symlink_scripts.pl
>> maintenance/symlink_scripts.PLS
> The 1st is created by Makefile.PL (basically its a rename of the 2nd) 
> and is run during 'make install'. From the POD:
> "This script will create a symlink in the 'installscript' directory (as 
> defined during install) to a script in that same directory.  It was 
> written to create a symlink with the name 'bp_pg_bulk_load_gff.pl' that 
> targeted 'bp_bulk_load_gff.pl' but can be extended by adding files to 
> the %symlink_scripts hash.
> Perl function 'symlink' is used to keep the script from crashing on 
> systems that don't allow symbolic linking."

The question is, do we need this symlink? Is the bulk_load_gff stuff 
still relevant? Why was it needed in the first place?
For me, it doesn't seem to do anything useful; it just creates a broken 
symlink in PREFIX/bin.

>> scripts/install_bioperl_scripts.pl
> This is also run automatically on 'make install'.

Not any more it isn't. Makefile.PL has (some of, at least) this script's 
methods. Does anyone use it manually? I propose removing it from CVS.

AFAICT, Makefile.PL only ever installs to scripts_temp? How would people 
normally expect to define the script installation directory?
Maybe it used to install scripts to user-defined or typical places (eg. 
/usr/local/bin as David Messina suggests) but that got broken in a 
recent commit?

Can anyone confirm if script installation works properly for them, and 
how they got it to work?

More information about the Bioperl-l mailing list