Re: [MacPerl] Installing on Users' Macs

["Jefferson R. Lowrey" <lowrey@postoffice.sells.com>]

At 4:30 PM -0500 12/2/98, Chris Nandor wrote:
>I keep hearing that it is some sort of problem to install MacPerl on users'
>machines.  I don't get it.  I really don't.  Hard drive space is a good
>reason, but other than that, I don't get it.

Hard drive space is a good reason.  It's not what I think of ususally,
though.  I can't exactly explain it, but the thought of installing MacPerl
on user machines gives me a bit of the willies (for the international
readers - this is not a clinton reference).  I find myself lumping MacPerl
into a Development tools category.  When I consider installing it
everywhere on our network - it generates the same kinds of thoughts that
installing CodeWarrior everywhere on our network would.  Of course, both
are equally harmless, it just still bugs me.

I suppose one problem with installing MacPerl is that users can, and would,
throw random files away "Because I didn't think I needed them, and I had to
make space for this avi my friend told me about".  Would you want your
script to suddenly be unable to find Mac:Apps:Launch, or perhaps
lib:GUSI.ph or some such?    Yes, it *should* fail gracefully in that case,
and probably would.  But the script would still be unusable, and you'd
still have to reload anything that got dumped.

>
>I can think of a few solutions, though.
>
>One would be to make a static build of MacPerl for PPC and 68K that had all
>the text files  (.pl, .ph, .pm, etc.) in the resource fork.  One big app
>with everything, hold the mayo.

Yikes.  Now *that's* a sandwich.

>
>The other is a script that would, after installing MacPerl, make the folder
>invisible and lock everything up so it could not be "messed" with by
>anyone.  A corresponding unlock/visible script could be made, too.

Would this prevent MacPerl from seeing files it needed?  Would this prevent
scripts from finding files *they* needed?  It shouldn't, right?

>
>Thoughts?  The second idea can be implemented now.  The first can only be
>implemented right now with 68K code, but in the future it could be done
>with both, I think.
>
>I would still install the entire MacPerl installation on everyone's
>machines, but this might help others of you who have really stupid users.
>:-)

And I quote
"Is it possible to get programed to the Internet e-mail or shown how to get
connected when there is time in your schedules?"

-Jefferson R. Lowrey
Systems Programmer
Sells Printing Company



***** Want to unsubscribe from this list?
***** Send mail with body "unsubscribe" to mac-perl-request@iis.ee.ethz.ch