Which cpan installer is the right one? (CPAN.pm/CPANPLUS/cpanminus) - perl

There are multiple installers for cpan modules available; I know of at least CPAN.pm (comes with perl,) CPANPLUS, and cpanminus.
What is the difference between the three?
What situations call for using one over the other?
Are there other module installers I should know about?

CPAN.pm (cpan) is the original client. It comes with Perl, so you already have it. It has the most features. It has a lot of configuration options to customize the way it works, though virtually everyone accepts the default installation. It integrates easily with local::lib.
cpanminus (cpanm) is an attempt to make a zero-configuration client that automatically does the right thing for most users. It's also designed to run well on systems with limited resources (e.g. a VPS). It doesn't come with Perl, but it's easy to install. It integrates easily with local::lib.
Its biggest limitation is its lack of configuration. If you want to do something unusual, it may not support it.
CPANPLUS (cpanp) is an attempt to make a CPAN API that Perl programs can use, instead of an app that you use from the command line. The cpanp shell is more of a proof-of-concept, and I don't know of any real advantages to using it.
In summary, I'd recommend either cpan or cpanm. If you have trouble configuring cpan, try cpanm. If your situation is unusual, try cpan.

It's impossible answer this question because it is too subjective. :)
From my point of view: cpanm is the simplest way install perl modules. You can install cpanm with:
curl -L http://cpanmin.us | perl - --sudo App::cpanminus
and after it you can install modules with simple:
cpanm Some::Module
You can use cpanm for mirroring (part of) CPAN to you local machine too, so IMHO cpanm is the best for the most common CPAN needs.

Are there other module installers I
should know about?
If you're using a Linux distribution that packages CPAN modules, then it's worth using their package installation program to install modules. For example, Ubuntu/Debian have a huge number of CPAN modules that you can install using 'apt' and Red Hat/Centos/Fedora have a number that you can install using 'yum'.

CPAN is the standard. cpanminus (cpanm) asks fewer questions (best most of the time). I don't know anyone that uses cpanplus.
Since what these modules do is download, compile and install (place files in correct places) they all should do the same task. Some of the difference has to do with the permissions level you have. Perhaps you want to install some things local to your user and some things globally then you need a finer adjustment. Developers may also need to control/interrupt the process for debugging etc.
For daily use, use cpanm, unless you are too lazy to install it, then CPAN is fine.

cpanm uses much less memory. This makes it a better choice for environments where RAM is limited, such as shared hosting servers, where regular cpan might die before completing installation task, due to attempting to use more than available memory.
According to cpanm's (1.7044) documentation "When running, it requires only 10MB of RAM"

Related

What is the difference between cpan/cpanm and cpm? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Which cpan installer is the right one? (CPAN.pm/CPANPLUS/cpanminus)
(5 answers)
Closed 4 years ago.
What is the difference between the cpan/cpanm and cpm commands?
I'm perl-begginer. What I can use: cpan/cpanm or cpm? Thanks.
These are all different programs that essentially do the same thing. They install modules from the CPAN (Comprehensive Perl Archive Network) to your computer.
cpan is the utility that Perl brings to install modules. It can be used as a shell or a simple command line utility. It uses the module CPAN under the hood.
cpanp is the utility to use the CPANPLUS module. It also has an integrated shell, and in general is a bit faster than the classic cpan tool.
cpanm is a faster, less fully-featured CPAN client that comes with the App::cpanminus distribution. It does not have a shell, and is the de-facto standard today, as most people recommend using it. It's fast, easy to use and usually you don't have to care about what is happening behind the scenes. There's also the handy cpanm-reporter in a separate distribution, that you can use to send test reports of your installations to cpantesters.org, which will then show up on metaCPAN and in other places, so other people know whether a certain dist will work with their OS and Perl version.
cpm is yet another client to install modules from CPAN. It's relatively new and claims to be very fast. It uses Menlo under the hood, which is the new backend the author of cpanm is working on to replace the internals of that one. It does not have a shell.
If all you want to do is install modules, it really doesn't matter what you use. cpan will always be available, but once you're used to cpanm it starts feeling a bit tedious.
I suggest you use whatever you feel comfortable with.

Install cpan modules through perl script?

I want a perl script that will install all the cpan modules automatically when running the perl script.Can you help this?
The CPAN client is just a Perl module which is wrapped by the command line tool. You therefore directly invoke it from a Perl script.
However, you may require system administrator priveleges to install new modules. One way to circumvent that is to use local::lib, or to ask the user for the necessary privileges. On Unixes, you could refuse to run your script if not run as root. However, that opens up many security issues and should be avoided if possible.
A fairly sane solution would be to require your users to install the cpanm client, and specify your dependencies in a cpanfile. Your users then just have to do cpanm --installdeps /dir/of/your/script.
But if we are already going through all that trouble, you might as well make a proper CPAN distribution. You don't have to upload it to CPAN, but you can distribute the tarball, and have your users install that. This has many advantages: Mature toolchains, automated testing, and wonderful helpers like Dist::Zilla that make creating a distribution a breeze.
Use CPAN::Shell, from the docs:
CPAN::Shell->install("Acme::Meta");

How do I use perlbrew to manage perl installations aimed at web applications?

I have been using perlbrew to manage multiple versions of perl on a Linux Fedora notebook. I have used it with great benefit to run command-line scripts mostly using App::cmd.
I now want to move to running web applications written using CGI::Application using different perls installed in my $HOME. I am familiar with running Perl web applications in $HOMEs using Apache's user_dir or creating Virtual Hosts but I am unable to come up with a clean way of integrating this and the perlbrew managed perls. Specifically I need help in understanding and finding answers to these questions:
How do install mod_perl under perlbrew?
Assuming this is done, how do I configure my VirtualHost so that it picks up the correct perl that is current?
If this is not possible, (which I doubt) can I at least use local installations to run vanilla CGI?
Thank you for your attention.
I don't think this is a good use for perlbrew, which moves around symlinks under its own directory. The trick is switching the mod_perl module around. Remember, mod_perl is going to be binary-incompatible between major versions of perl, and that you will have to compile it against apache for each version of perl (and apache) you want to use.
perlbrew really does two big things for you:
Installs perl, which is trivially easy to do on your own.
Switches around symlinks so perl is whatever version you want.
If you give up on that last one, perlbrew isn't really doing that much for you. I don't think the symlink feature is particularly valuable.
I think perlbrew is fine for what it is, but when you start doing things outside of its limited scope, it's time to not use it. It's supposed to be a tool to save you some time and headache, so if it's not accomplishing that goal, it's not the right tool for your situation.
In this situation, where I'm supporting a single, big web application, I give it its own perl installation that I don't let anything else use.
For your other questions:
markdown placeholder
You shouldn't have to configure any VirtualHost stuff. If you are using mod_perl, perl is already in there and you don't get to choose a perl. If you're using CGI stuff, you specify the perl on the shebang line. You will have to ensure apache picks up the right library directories, but I think perlbrew handles that. You might have to use SetEnv or something similar in your httpd.conf.
For vanilla CGI, just point to the right (symlink) path for whatever the default perlbrew version is. The CGI program will just use whatever perl that path points to.
See brian d foy's answer for why not to expect to use perlbrew to switch between versions of mod_perl. I also expect that you will need to run multiple Apache servers, if you need multiple different Perl versions under mod_perl.
However, using perlbrew as an easy way to build Perl is IMHO a valid thing to do, and there are few instructions available for how to run mod_perl under perlbrew.
First ensure perl is built with shared library support, by passing the -Duseshrplib flag (otherwise on 64-bit systems you will get a confusing build failure about -fPIC):
perlbrew install perl-5.16.3 -Duseshrplib
Install the development Apache libraries for your system. On Debian, this differs depending on the Apache MPM that you are using. For the prefork MPM:
sudo apt-get install apache2-prefork-dev
Or for the worker MPM:
sudo apt-get install apache2-threaded-dev
Then you need some options to build and install mod_perl2 into the right place. Note that this means cpanm will fail to build it, but you could use it to get hold of the source:
cpanm mod_perl2 # fails
cd ~/.cpanm/latest-build/mod_perl-2.0.8/ # adjust mod_perl version
Adjust the version of Perl below accordingly. (The MP_APXS option is to give the right path for Debian-based systems, which you might not need.)
perl Makefile.PL MP_APXS=/usr/bin/apxs2 \
MP_AP_DESTDIR=$HOME/perl5/perlbrew/perls/perl-5.16.3/
make
make install
Finally, change the LoadModule line in your Apache configuration file (adjusting paths accordingly):
LoadModule perl_module <your homedir>/perl5/perlbrew/perls/<your perl>/usr/lib/apache2/modules/mod_perl.so
Your mod_perl installation will now be running the version of Perl that you want. Install all your required CPAN modules and get going.

What's the best system for installing a Perl web app?

It seems that most of the installers for Perl are centered around installing Perl modules, not applications. Things like ExtUtils::MakeMaker and Module::Build are very well suited for modules, but require some additional work for Web Apps.
Ideally it would be nice to be able to do the following after checking out the source from the repository:
Have missing dependencies detected
Download and install dependencies from CPAN
Run a command to "Build" the source into a final state (perform any source parsing or configuration necessary for the local environment).
Run a command to install the built files into the appropriate locations. Not only the perl modules, but also things like template (.tt) files, and CGI scripts, JS and image files that should be web-accessible.
Make sure proper permissions are set on installed files (and SELinux context if necessary).
Right now we have a system based on Module::Build that does most of this. The work was done by done by my co-worker who was learning to use Module::Build at the time, and we'd like some advice on generalizing our solution, since it's fairly app-specific right now. In particular, our system requires us to install dependencies by hand (although it does detect them).
Is there any particular system you've used that's been particularly successful? Do you have to write an installer based on Module::Build or ExtUtils::MakeMaker that's particular to your application, or is something more general available?
EDIT: To answer brian's questions below:
We can log into the machines
We do not have root access to the machines
The machines are all (ostensibly) identical builds of RHEL5 with SELinux enabled
Currently, the people installing the machines are only programmers from our group, and our source is not available to the general public. However, it's conceivable our source could eventually be installed on someone else's machines in our organization, to be installed by their programmers or systems people.
We install by checking out from the repository, though we'd like to have the option of using a distributed archive (see above).
The answer suggesting RPM is definitely a good one. Using your system's package manager can definitely make your life easier. However, it might mean you also need to package up a bunch of other Perl modules.
You might also take a look at Shipwright. This is a Perl-based tool for packaging up an app and all its Perl module dependencies. It's early days yet, but it looks promising.
As far as installing dependencies, it wouldn't be hard to simply package up a bunch of tarballs and then have you Module::Build-based solution install them. You should take a look at pip, which makes installing a module from a tarball quite trivial. You could package this with your code base and simply call it from your own installer to handle the deps.
I question whether relying on CPAN is a good idea. The CPAN shell always fetches the latest version of a distro, rather than a specific version. If you're interested in ensuring repeatable installs, it's not the right tool.
What are your limitations for installing web apps? Can you log into the machine? Are all of the machines running the same thing? Are the people installing the web apps co-workers or random people from the general public? Are the people installing this sysadmins, programmers, web managers, or something else? Do you install by distributed an archive or checking out from source control?
For most of my stuff, which involves sysadmins familiar with Perl installing in control environments, I just use MakeMaker. It's easy to get it to do all the things you listed if you know a little about MakeMaker. If you want to know more about that, ask a another question. ;) Module::Build is just as easy, though, and the way to go if you don't already like using MakeMaker.
Module::Build would be a good way to go to handle lots of different situations if the people are moderately clueful about the command line and installing software. You'll have a lot of flexibility with Module::Build, but also a bit more work. And, the cpan tool (which comes with Perl), can install from the current directory and handle dependencies for you. Just tell it to install the current directory:
$ cpan .
If you only have to install on a single platorm, you'll probably have an easier time making a package in the native format. You could even have Module::Build make that package for you so the developers have the flexibility of Module::Build, but the installers have the ease of the native process. Sticking with Module::Build also means that you could create different packages for different platforms from a single build tool.
If the people installing the web application really have no idea about command lines, CPAN, and other things, you'll probably want to use a packager and installer that doesn't scare them or make them think about what is going on, and can accurately report problems to you automatically.
As Dave points out, using a real CPAN mirror always gets you the latest version of a module, but you can also make your own "fake" CPAN mirror with exactly the distributions you want and have the normal CPAN tools install from that. For our customers, we make "CPAN on a CD" (although thumb drives are good now too). With a simple "run me" script everything gets installed in exactly the versions they need. See, for instance, my Making my own CPAN talk if you're interested in that. Again, consider the audience when you think about that. It's not something you'd hand to the general public.
Good luck, :)
I'd recommend seriously considering a package system such as RPM to do this. Even if you're running on Windows I'd consider RPM and cygwin to do the installation. You could even set up a yum or apt repository to deliver the packages to remote systems.
If you're looking for a general installer for customers running any number of OSes and distros, then the problem becomes much harder.
Take a look at PAR.
Jonathan Rockway as a small section on using this with Catalyst in his book.

How do I use a vendor Apache with a self-compiled Perl and mod_perl?

I want to use Apple's or RedHat's built-in Apache but I want to use Perl 5.10 and mod_perl. What's the least intrusive way to accomplish this? I want the advantage of free security patching for the vendor's Apache, dav, php, etc., but I care a lot about which version of Perl I use and what's in my #INC path. I don't mind compiling my own mod_perl.
Build your version of Perl 5.10 following any special instructions from the mod_perl documentation. Tell Perl configurator to install in some non-standard place, like /usr/local/perl/5.10.0
Use the instructions to build a shared library (or dynamic, or .so) mod_perl against your distribution's Apache, but make sure you run the Makefile.PL using your version of perl:
/usr/local/perl/5.10.0/bin/perl Makefile.PL APXS=/usr/bin/apxs
Install and configure mod_perl like normal.
It may be helpful, after step one, to change your path so you don't accidentially get confused about which version of Perl you're using:
export PATH=/usr/local/perl/5.10.0/bin:$PATH
You'll want to look into mod_so
I've done this before. It wasn't pretty, but it worked, especially since vendor perl's are usually 2-3 years old.
I started with making my own perl RPM that installed perl into a different location, like /opt/. This was pretty straight forward. I mostly started with this because I didn't want the system utilities that used perl to break when I upgraded/installed new modules. I had to modify all my scripts to specify #!/opt/bin/perl at the top and sometimes I even played with the path to make sure my perl came first.
Next, I grabbed a mod_perl source RPM and modified it to use my /opt/bin/perl instead of /usr/bin/perl. I don't have access to the changes I made, since it was at a different gig. It took me a bit of playing around to get it.
It did work, but I'm not an RPM wizard, so dependency checking didn't work out so well. For example, I could uninstall my custom RPM and break everything. It wasn't a big deal for me, so I moved on.
I was also mixing RPM's with CPAN installs of modules (did I mention we built our own custom CPAN mirror with our own code?). This was a bit fragile too. Again, I didn't have the resources (ie, time) to figure out how to bend cpan2rpm to use my perl and not cause RPM conflicts.
If I had it all to do again, I would make a custom 5.10 perl RPM and just replace the system perl. Then I would use cpan2rpm to create the RPM packages I needed for my software and compile my own mod_perl RPM.