perl package split - if you maintain a perl-* module, read this message.
Ralf Corsepius
rc040203 at freenet.de
Wed Apr 18 08:13:43 UTC 2007
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 15:12 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 April 2007 15:04:47 Robin Norwood wrote:
> > Well, would you be happier with the 'not adding the packages to the
> > buildroots' idea? IOW, package owners will have to add the proper
> > BuildRequires to their packages (which is really the more correct
> > solution).
>
> Well, not exactly, because either way the packages as is will not rebuild, if
> you unlink perl-devel from perl.
I think there is consensus amongst most perl-packagers that such a
circular dep between perl<->perl-devel is not useful. Unfortunately
FC7's perl has not seen updates in recent weeks, which would have
allowed to iron out issue earlier.
> The only way I would be _really_ happy is
> if all our perl packages picked up this dep change and were rebuilt so that
> anybody rebuilding our shipped srpms can do so without issue. If I can't get
> that... then yeah, I think we should force the addition of perl-devel into
> specs by not making it available in the buildroot. Of course I may be voted
> down...
Note that all this only affects "BuildRequires:". I.e. packages would
only be hit by the "packaging changes" during rebuilds (In 90% of all
cases they fail very hard with obvious fixes implied).
So, simply pushing (bug-fixed) split perl packages and not rebuilding
nor changing buildroots would effectively mean to "grandfather" the "old
packaging".
Ralf
More information about the devel
mailing list