activestate perl on cygwin

Andrew DeFaria
Thu Jan 11 04:33:00 GMT 2007 wrote:
> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
> ...
>>> I don't actually install through cygwin, but use the ppm installer 
>>> from Activestate.
>> Why people would want to use a proprietary Perl with a proprietary 
>> installer is beyond me. Let me ask you a question, what happens when 
>> you call setsid in this ActiveState Perl? Anyways...
> Well, in my case when I make the call I run perl on Linux. Here I had 
> to write a scripton a windows machine and before checking cygwin I 
> checked activestate. Then I needed some modules, DBD:Orcale to be exact.
Maybe you should have looked for DBD::Oracle instead? :-)

There's another thing. Why spend all kinds of $$$ on Oracle when one can 
use a fine database like MySQL for free?
> This was a HUGE pain to get it to work, as Activestate has no binary.
Well I've never tried to get Oracle working through Cygwin (again I 
would just use MySQL) but you say it was a pain to get to work under 
ActiveState. Did you try to get it to work under Cygwin?
> After having gone through this I got a further request: "can your 
> script do some graphs to?" Then I thought of grace which does not work 
> under windows, hence cygwin. But then I remembered the Oracle pains 
> and though" what it Oracle has a problem with cygwin or is a similar 
> pain(I had some equally bad experience installing an oracle client on 
> Linux), so since I'm no Oracle expert
> and would not have much help I decided not to mess with the 
> perl+oracle DBD, hence installed the cygwin modules except perl. Ugly, 
> but seems to work...
Aside from the grammatical errors my point still stands. AFAIK ppm, 
ActiveState's module installer, only works in ActiveState and I don't 
believe that ActiveState works on Linux, Unix and Macs, whereas the 
standard perl -MCPAN thing works on all of those and Windows too, under 
Cygwin of course. And to me Cygwin is precisely that bit of great glue 
that can make all of these platforms relatively the same and portable. 
As such, insisting on a product that only works on one platform and 
works differently than all other platforms just doesn't seem the right 
way to go. And yes I know many clients (I'm a contractor and have 
clients too - I'm not without experience here) don't, for some reason or 
another, trust or rely on Cygwin in this fashion to help "normalize" the 
environment so that many applications can be written and shared between 
the various platforms that these clients have. However that doesn't mean 
that this is not the best way to go, IMHO. YMMV, and all that.


Andrew DeFaria <>
That's a hell of an ambition, to be mellow. It's like wanting to be 
senile. - Randy Newman

Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

More information about the Cygwin mailing list