问题
I've got a collection of Perl scripts and a couple XML data files that they depend on which I'd like to distribute. Currently, I've got a shell script which copies bin/* and share/* to a target installation tree. It seems a little clunky, so I'd like to go with something like the standard CPAN way of packaging Perl.
Does is make sense to bundle what I've got in a CPAN-style package? I suspect there is nothing wrong with it, but every tutorial I've looked at thinks that lib/Blah.pm is an essential file in any package - I don't even have a lib/ directory, let alone any .pm files.
Is there a standard solution for packaging a collection of Perl scripts, along with some data in a share/ directory?
回答1:
Distributions don't care about modules. Most of the tools are set up to handle modules by default because that's the common case, but you can really distribute anything as long as you provide the logic to tell the build files what to do with whatever files that you provide.
ExtUtils::Makemaker is difficult to use for this sort of thing, but Module::Build (despite the word "Module") makes it much easier. However, you have to know a bit about custom Module::Build classes so you can override the default behavior that you don't want.
If you are talking about standalone scripts, you can look at my scriptdist distribution, or the Dr. Dobbs article I wrote about it. It won't handle the share/ portion for you, but it's not too hard to add.
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4741142/perl-cpan-style-packaging-with-no-lib-pm