is there a reason why you offer the Percona Toolkit only as ‘deb’ or ‘rpm’ package? The rpm package has some dependencies which are not fullfilled in the way expected by the the rpm package, but ARE fullfilled from the perspective of Perl. So, would it be possible to get a common tar.gz file which could be installed the usual way:
thank you for this answer. In this case I want to propose that you add the option ‘tar.gz’ in the drop down as seen at other places too.
Another comment. The whole .tar.gz distribution can be installed like a charm with the well known Perl tool ‘cpanm’.
I did a which installed all components as expected.
cpanm is able to install all prerequisites depending on the documented dependencies in that distribution. And there I found out that some modules are missing.
When you look at the Makefile.PL you can see the lines
I did a static code analysis on all of your scripts searching for use and require statements.
After matching the corelists of the perl version 5.008, I’m pretty sure that the following
external dependencies are missing:
As soon as these dependencies are declared in the Makefile.PL a tool like cpanm is able to pull all requirements from CPAN.
With this static analysis I’m of course not able to see which minimum version has to be installed to let the whole thing work as expected.
I woud be glad to see these dependencies declared explicitly in a future version of percona-toolkit.