perl-devel August 2005

perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

4 participants
63 discussions

Start a nNew thread

[Bug 165885] Misnamed package, add Provides?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 19 Aug '05

19 Aug '05

1 0

[Bug 165885] Misnamed package, add Provides?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Aug '05

18 Aug '05

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Misnamed package, add Provides? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165885 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203(a)freenet.de 2005-08-18 23:03 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > Sure, it wasn't entirely unexpected, otherwise I would have noticed it in my > Anyway, as said, IMO it's Ralf's call whether he wants to do something about > this package, and my .02€ is listed in the summary and initial comment of this > bug... ... and I had asked for opinions in comment #3 ;) Tell me how you want me to proceed with it. To me, the current naming of this package is fine, but I also don't have a problem in changing it, if there is common agreement on this matter. Technically, adding a "provides: perl-gettext" is matter of minutes, but renaming the package would require more "brains". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

1 0

[Bug 165907] perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Aug '05

18 Aug '05

1 0

[Bug 165885] Misnamed package, add Provides?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Aug '05

18 Aug '05

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Misnamed package, add Provides? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165885 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta(a)iki.fi 2005-08-18 14:05 EST ------- Sure, it wasn't entirely unexpected, otherwise I would have noticed it in my review :) But I still think using the CPAN distribution name is the right thing to do, at least wrt the guidelines. Why settle for "usually they have a main module", and spend time pondering what might The Module be (checking VERSION_FROM is not necessarily a very good criteria for that), when all of them have an unambiguous distribution name as long as the unit of packaging is the very distribution? Anyway, as said, IMO it's Ralf's call whether he wants to do something about this package, and my .02€ is listed in the summary and initial comment of this bug... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

1 0

[Bug 165907] perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Aug '05

18 Aug '05

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165907 ------- Additional Comments From altblue(a)n0i.net 2005-08-18 13:55 EST ------- Paul, let's keep it all in one place ;-) > Is there an "approved" way of packaging later versions of specific > modules that are bundled with the perl rpm? This is sometimes needed to > satisfy dependencies, particularly for legacy distros. If there is one, I haven't heard about it. All I know is there were some discussions on this issue on the various RedHat/Fedora mailing lists, but AFAIR there was no (positive) conclusion. So, for what it worths, what I do now is something like: build packages for those updated module replacing the usual %{_mandir} (/usr/share/man) with /usr/local/share/man, replacing %{_bindir} (/usr/bin) with /usr/local/bin, and using vendor install for the modules. It's nasty/ugly/bad/etc ... but it's my (bad) way and "works for me". OFC, this way I cannot either use the stock RH/FC perl package (those missing versions in Obsoletes being an issue). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

1 0

[Bug 165907] perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Aug '05

18 Aug '05

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165907 ------- Additional Comments From altblue(a)n0i.net 2005-08-18 13:45 EST ------- On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 13:16 -0400, bugzilla(a)redhat.com wrote: > ------- Additional Comments From altblue(a)n0i.net 2005-08-18 13:16 EST ------- > > Second patch - core modules > JPO, if you are at this, please add versions to all those Obsoletes packages, > something like: > Obsoletes: perl-Time-HiRes <= 1.65 > > This way, in a future ideal world maybe we could be able to build our own > perl-CGI, perl-CPAN, etc updated packages without having to cope with the > "main" perl package. Is there an "approved" way of packaging later versions of specific modules that are bundled with the perl rpm? This is sometimes needed to satisfy dependencies, particularly for legacy distros. Paul. -- Paul Howarth <paul(a)city-fan.org> -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

1 0

[Bug 165885] Misnamed package, add Provides?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Aug '05

18 Aug '05

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Misnamed package, add Provides? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165885 ------- Additional Comments From altblue(a)n0i.net 2005-08-18 13:38 EST ------- > IMO, that makes no sense because the unit of CPAN module packaging is a CPAN > _distribution_, and the vast majority those distributions contain more than > one module. What's "the CPAN module name" then? Usually, each cpan distribution has a so called "main module", hence the VERSION_FROM MakeMaker option. So, IMHO, maybe Ralf's choice was not so bad after all, or at least I think he has a point. ;-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

1 0

[Bug 165907] perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Aug '05

18 Aug '05

2 1

[Bug 161785] spamassassin restart fails - functions bug?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Aug '05

16 Aug '05

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: spamassassin restart fails - functions bug? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=161785 wtogami(a)redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |150222 nThis| | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

1 0

[Bug 161785] spamassassin restart fails - functions bug?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Aug '05

16 Aug '05

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: spamassassin restart fails - functions bug? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=161785 wtogami(a)redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |gunchev(a)gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami(a)redhat.com 2005-08-17 00:19 EST ------- *** Bug 141323 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

perl-devel August 2005