Get Iplayer for Windows

[David Woodhouse]

On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 19:24 +0100, dinkypumpkin wrote:
> On 08/08/2011 11:47, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > It'd be really good to use 'pp' to make the subset of perl files that we
> > need for get_iplayer; the hack with a 'perlfiles.tar.gz' is horrid. Did
> > you look at what it would take to automate that?
> 
> I should have mentioned that in my earlier message.  I've done exactly 
> that, but it raises a few issues:
> 
> 1. It means the installer would always have to be built on Windows 
> (probably no bad thing), though "perlfiles.tar.gz" could always be 
> captured as necessary.

Why so? Doesn't it work in wine?

> 3. So if I upgrade the version of Perl, I'd like to go to 5.12.  If 
> anyone thinks there is a reason to only go to 5.10.1 instead, chime in here.

Might as well update to 5.12, I think. Why stay on something older?

> > Also, it's possible to update the downloads without having to update the
> > installer; they're done through redirects from a CGI script. Perhaps we
> > should update the URLs that the CGI script redirects to?
> 
> This will require some thought.  In the current installer, only rtmpdump 
> uses the redirects set up at infradead.org, and changing them now would 
> break the installer in some cases, including rtmpdump.  At a minimum, I 
> think we would need to create another CGI script or update the current 
> one to accept some sort of installer version identifier so that it could 
> service both current and future installers.
> 
> This is due to another issue:  Even if the downloads are discovered 
> dynamically, the installer code is still hard-wired to handle the type 
> and structure of each downloaded archive.  I've simplified things a bit, 
> but that hard-wiring is still there in reduced form.  I suppose that the 
> installer code could be rewritten to deal with this problem, but I 
> haven't bothered to tackle it.  I'll have another look.

More trouble than it's worth, I suspect.

I think the main reason for the redirects originally was not so that it
could adapt to new versions of tools, but more that it could adapt if
the external URLs stopped working; it could be pointed to another mirror
or something.

If we're pointing at stable download locations, we should be fine.

I'm not interested in trying to make Windows a usable platform with sane
package management, etc. Let's just install something that's known to
work, and hope it keeps working. And keeps being available from the same
download location.

-- 
dwmw2