[Once again, I’m rudely following up to myself, but I think this discussion needs public review.]
Dream Host Support wrote:
[quote]Bob W. wrote:
[quote]You guys crack me up…
That’s great, we aim to please.
I’m pretty sure I answered this with the last response, but here are
more details (I know you love details):
Hey, take a gander at the response I just sent to . You’ll love it.
In short–probably. See the next part for explanation.
[quote]If so, could we either correct the KBase list, or check all the
machines to make sure the defaults are really installed? I just don’t
want to run into this again with other modules that are supposed to
be there already.
Well, as I tersely told you before, “Not really.” The list from KBase
is not a definitive list.
Ah. The KBase post makes it sound that way…
[quote]It probably does not reflect every perl
module on the machines, and some machines may be inconsistent. I’ll
update that KBase entry now to include a disclaimer.
[quote]We are working on making all machines 99% consistent on installed
software (in fact it’s what I’m doing right after I finish writing
you), but we aren’t there yet. They are more like 90% at this point.
Having the installed Perl modules be consistent is extremely important
to us (as it allows machines to be totally redundant). However, listing
every installed Perl module isn’t.
It’s hard to list every installed Perl module. We could maybe write a
script to find all files named .pm and parse the module name from the
path preceding the filename and automatically put that list in KBase,
but that isn’t top on our list of priorities.
That would be a beautiful thing, and it would avoid users’ having to run into a brick wall before writing to Support.
[quote]Like I said before, if a module you want to use isn’t installed, in 9
out of 10 cases we’ll have it installed for you in a couple of hours.
We also have the “standard” modules that come with perl5 for sure and
most other extremely popular modules.
To be frank, I don’t know why you want a 100% accurate list.
Weird. I don’t know why anyone wouldn’t want a 100% accurate list (more below).
see how it would help you (other than to make us less busy writing tech
support back to you).
That’s partially the point. Hey, why add the extra work for yourself and the user? It’d just be nice to know what’s there / not there so we know whether to start developing and testing a script, or instead to write and ask for installation.
If I know at 3pm that I’m going to need a module that’s not installed, it’d be best to write to support at that time, rather than having to wait until 3am when I’m ready to start testing… and find out it’s not there. (I’m assuming 3am installs don’t happen as fast as 3pm installs).
I think the more imprtant point is that the KBase entry is incorrect. Those modules aren’t really installed by default… So, if the KBase entry just said what you said above – that not all machines have all modules listed – then I wouldn’t have had to ask if that’s the case (and you wouldn’t have had to reply ).
[quote]If a module is missing we will install it
You’ve proven that (during daylight hours, at least).
[quote]So please be a little more understanding and cut us just a tiny bit of
[quote]I just reread this response and am hoping you aren’t put
off by its slightly surly tone. I’m just trying to give it to you
straight. I apologize if I seem like a jerk.
Sorry, but I have absolutely no idea why you’re offended.
All I asked was what modules are installed, and what modules are listed as being installed when they’re not. The KBase item is incorrect, so I just needed clarification. I didn’t ask you to do anything but give me information.
Maybe you’re having a bad day, eh?
[quote]So, I’m sorry we won’t be updating that list (maybe I’ll do it on a
The disclaimer will serve that purpose just fine in the interim… thanks.
[quote]but in the meantime, have fun with Image::Size!
I’ve already got the script up and running. Works like a charm!