From cturner at pattern.net Mon May 2 08:48:20 2005 From: cturner at pattern.net (Chip Turner) Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 04:48:20 -0400 Subject: Overriding core Perl modules In-Reply-To: (Kenneth Porter's message of "Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:02:03 -0700") References: <1DE837FA04C1837649B9AFC8@[10.169.6.246]> Message-ID: Kenneth Porter writes: > --On Wednesday, April 27, 2005 11:43 AM -0400 Chip Turner > wrote: > >> Yep, this option works too, except that upgrading to a new Perl would >> still use the old module. Probably okay. (or is rawhide set so that >> site_perl comes before vendor_perl and even the local perl's dirs, >> now? I think I fixed that, not sure) > > That would be nice. Currently (FC2 for me) one must issue a "use lib" > in code that needs to override builtins with site libs. Sadly it only gets us part of the way there. Other files, besides manpages pop up. /usr/bin is a common one, but easily dealt with. The real scary one is /usr/share/doc -- the files aren't in the buildroot when %install is being run! RPM places them there later. This is difficult to avoid short of ignoring the local policy and redefining docdir or somesuch... which I am not totally in favor of. The net result there is although you could still perhaps override core perl modules with these kinds of RPMs, you can't really install two concurrent ones (ie, perl-Foo-1.1 and perl-Foo-1.2) since they would conflict over docdir. RPM-Specfile-1.19 is being uploaded to CPAN tonight. It contains this change (--use-usr-local, horrible name, alas) as well as the code to detect the name of the top level tarball. Please give it a whirl! Thanks, Chip -- Chip Turner cturner at pattern.net From cturner at pattern.net Mon May 2 08:49:53 2005 From: cturner at pattern.net (Chip Turner) Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 04:49:53 -0400 Subject: Overriding core Perl modules In-Reply-To: <1114620217.16489.85.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> (Ville =?utf-8?q?Skytt=C3=A4's?= message of "Wed, 27 Apr 2005 19:43:37 +0300") References: <1DE837FA04C1837649B9AFC8@[10.169.6.246]> <1114620217.16489.85.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> Message-ID: Ville Skytt? writes: >> But hey, I could change cpanflute2 to at least offer a >> --local-manpages option un the meantime, til perl is fixed, that would >> move whatever was in /usr/man to /usr/local/man; would that suffice? > > Hm, is there a "/share" missing before "/man" in both paths above? Yeah, my bad. What it does now (when --use-usr-local is specified) is this: for dir in bin share/doc share/man; do if [ -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/$dir ]; then mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/local/$dir mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/$dir/* $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/local/$dir/ rm -Rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/$dir fi done So /usr/bin, /usr/share/doc, and /usr/share/man are all migrated over to /usr/local (though share/doc shouldn't be there... you never know) Chip -- Chip Turner cturner at pattern.net From cturner at pattern.net Mon May 2 08:55:59 2005 From: cturner at pattern.net (Chip Turner) Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 04:55:59 -0400 Subject: CGI vs mod_perl vs perl (and others) In-Reply-To: <1480.213.13.86.79.1114290248.squirrel@webmail.lsd.di.uminho.pt> (Jose Pedro Oliveira's message of "Sat, 23 Apr 2005 22:04:08 +0100 (WEST)") References: <1480.213.13.86.79.1114290248.squirrel@webmail.lsd.di.uminho.pt> Message-ID: "Jose Pedro Oliveira" writes: > A couple of question and notes about the above lines: > > > 1) *HiRes* => perl-Time-HiRes > > Do you agree in bringing Time::HiRes back to the perl core > package? > > Perl 5.8 has been having a pretty fast release cycle with > the pumpkin manager Nicholas Clark: a new release almost every > four months (although I remember reading somewhere - maybe in > the perl5-porters mailing lists - that they were planning in > increasing the time between new 5.8 releases to 6 months). Yeah, this makes sense, given the faster turnaround of the 5.8 series lately. Too bad this wasn't the case of 5.8.1, else RHEL3 would have a better perl :( > 2) *Filter* => perl-Filter and perl-Filter-Simple > > The removal of Filter files causes similar problems Ditto here. > 3) *NDBM* => /dev/null ? > > Why has this module been erased? As far as I can tell > there is no external perl module being packaged with NDBM. It was removed because it really isn't necessary; there is DB_File which does the same, and on Linux, NDBM is just GDBM anyway, which is part of perl. This reduced the confusion and magic of the NDBM module since ndbm varies from platform to platform, making portable files impossible. Chip -- Chip Turner cturner at pattern.net From shiva at sewingwitch.com Mon May 2 15:42:26 2005 From: shiva at sewingwitch.com (Kenneth Porter) Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 08:42:26 -0700 Subject: Overriding core Perl modules In-Reply-To: References: <1DE837FA04C1837649B9AFC8@[10.169.6.246]> Message-ID: --On Monday, May 02, 2005 4:48 AM -0400 Chip Turner wrote: > you could still perhaps override core > perl modules with these kinds of RPMs, you can't really install two > concurrent ones (ie, perl-Foo-1.1 and perl-Foo-1.2) since they would > conflict over docdir. Are you talking about /usr/share/doc/*? On my FC2 installation, the subdirectory names in that directory have both package name and version, so multiple docdirs can coexist. That hasn't changed since FC2, has it? From rkearey at redhat.com Mon May 2 23:48:02 2005 From: rkearey at redhat.com (Rob Kearey) Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 09:48:02 +1000 Subject: FC3 perl update coming In-Reply-To: <42727FC0.9040805@redhat.com> References: <42705935.7040105@redhat.com> <42719915.7020908@redhat.com> <42727FC0.9040805@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4276BC32.2090304@redhat.com> Warren Togami wrote: > Warren Togami wrote: > >> >> http://people.redhat.com/wtogami/temp/perl-FC3/ >> http://people.redhat.com/wtogami/temp/perl-FC4/ > > > Anybody else tested it? Should we push this update? Fast CGI is stil broken for me. [robk at custard ~]$ rpm -q perl perl-5.8.5-12.FC3 [robk at custard ~]$ perl Config.pm-orig [robk at custard ~]$ perl -e "use CGI::Fast;" Can't locate FCGI.pm in @INC (@INC contains: [blah] -- Rob Kearey Website: http://apac.redhat.com Red Hat Asia-Pacific Legal: http://apac.redhat.com/disclaimer +61 7 3514 8102 Stuff: http://people.redhat.com/rkearey From cturner at pattern.net Mon May 2 23:52:04 2005 From: cturner at pattern.net (Chip Turner) Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 19:52:04 -0400 Subject: FC3 perl update coming In-Reply-To: <4276BC32.2090304@redhat.com> (Rob Kearey's message of "Tue, 03 May 2005 09:48:02 +1000") References: <42705935.7040105@redhat.com> <42719915.7020908@redhat.com> <42727FC0.9040805@redhat.com> <4276BC32.2090304@redhat.com> Message-ID: Rob Kearey writes: > Warren Togami wrote: >> Warren Togami wrote: >> >>> >>> http://people.redhat.com/wtogami/temp/perl-FC3/ >>> http://people.redhat.com/wtogami/temp/perl-FC4/ >> Anybody else tested it? Should we push this update? > > Fast CGI is stil broken for me. > > [robk at custard ~]$ rpm -q perl > perl-5.8.5-12.FC3 > [robk at custard ~]$ perl Config.pm-orig > [robk at custard ~]$ perl -e "use CGI::Fast;" > Can't locate FCGI.pm in @INC (@INC contains: [blah] I don't get what you're saying. FCGI is a separate perl module. perl and perl-CGI themselves doesn't (and likely will never) contain it. Install FCGI, that will fix it. I'm not sure why you expect updates to perl to fix this ? Chip -- Chip Turner cturner at pattern.net From rkearey at redhat.com Tue May 3 00:08:59 2005 From: rkearey at redhat.com (Rob Kearey) Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 10:08:59 +1000 Subject: FC3 perl update coming In-Reply-To: References: <42705935.7040105@redhat.com> <42719915.7020908@redhat.com> <42727FC0.9040805@redhat.com> <4276BC32.2090304@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4276C11B.1030703@redhat.com> Chip Turner wrote: > I don't get what you're saying. FCGI is a separate perl module. perl > and perl-CGI themselves doesn't (and likely will never) contain it. > Install FCGI, that will fix it. I'm not sure why you expect updates > to perl to fix this ? There's a simple explanation for that, and it's that I had my brain in backwards this morning. Please disregard :) > Chip -- Rob Kearey Website: http://apac.redhat.com Red Hat Asia-Pacific Legal: http://apac.redhat.com/disclaimer +61 7 3514 8102 Stuff: http://people.redhat.com/rkearey From cturner at pattern.net Tue May 3 00:29:21 2005 From: cturner at pattern.net (Chip Turner) Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 20:29:21 -0400 Subject: FC3 perl update coming In-Reply-To: <4276C11B.1030703@redhat.com> (Rob Kearey's message of "Tue, 03 May 2005 10:08:59 +1000") References: <42705935.7040105@redhat.com> <42719915.7020908@redhat.com> <42727FC0.9040805@redhat.com> <4276BC32.2090304@redhat.com> <4276C11B.1030703@redhat.com> Message-ID: Rob Kearey writes: > Chip Turner wrote: > >> I don't get what you're saying. FCGI is a separate perl module. perl >> and perl-CGI themselves doesn't (and likely will never) contain it. >> Install FCGI, that will fix it. I'm not sure why you expect updates >> to perl to fix this ? > > There's a simple explanation for that, and it's that I had my brain in > backwards this morning. Please disregard :) :) It sucks that CGI.pm requires an external module tht perl doesn't ship... just not much we can do about it :( Chip -- Chip Turner cturner at pattern.net From cturner at pattern.net Tue May 3 01:14:13 2005 From: cturner at pattern.net (Chip Turner) Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 21:14:13 -0400 Subject: Overriding core Perl modules In-Reply-To: (Kenneth Porter's message of "Mon, 02 May 2005 08:42:26 -0700") References: <1DE837FA04C1837649B9AFC8@[10.169.6.246]> Message-ID: Kenneth Porter writes: > --On Monday, May 02, 2005 4:48 AM -0400 Chip Turner > wrote: > >> you could still perhaps override core >> perl modules with these kinds of RPMs, you can't really install two >> concurrent ones (ie, perl-Foo-1.1 and perl-Foo-1.2) since they would >> conflict over docdir. > > Are you talking about /usr/share/doc/*? On my FC2 installation, the > subdirectory names in that directory have both package name and > version, so multiple docdirs can coexist. That hasn't changed since > FC2, has it? Ah, of course, good point. I must be blind :) Chip -- Chip Turner cturner at pattern.net From jpo at di.uminho.pt Wed May 4 04:27:00 2005 From: jpo at di.uminho.pt (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9_Pedro_Oliveira?=) Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 05:27:00 +0100 Subject: mod_perl 2.0.0 RC6 is out Message-ID: <42784F14.4020405@di.uminho.pt> mod_perl 2.0.0 RC6 (aka 1.999_23) is out! The update appears to be peaceful. Changelog http://search.cpan.org/~stas/mod_perl-2.0.0-RC6/Changes Diff http://search.cpan.org/diff?from=mod_perl-2.0.0-RC5&to=mod_perl-2.0.0-RC6 jpo -- Jos? Pedro Oliveira * mailto: jpo at di.uminho.pt * http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/~jpo * * gpg fingerprint = F9B6 8D87 859D 1C94 48F0 84C0 9749 9EB5 91BD 851B * From shiva at sewingwitch.com Wed May 4 23:57:35 2005 From: shiva at sewingwitch.com (Kenneth Porter) Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 16:57:35 -0700 Subject: Overriding core Perl modules In-Reply-To: References: <1DE837FA04C1837649B9AFC8@[10.169.6.246]> Message-ID: --On Monday, May 02, 2005 4:48 AM -0400 Chip Turner wrote: > RPM-Specfile-1.19 is being uploaded to CPAN tonight. It contains this > change (--use-usr-local, horrible name, alas) as well as the code to > detect the name of the top level tarball. Just got to try this to update MIME-Base64 to 3.05 on FC2. The magic command looks like this: cpanflute2 --buildall --use-usr-local --installdirs=site MIME-Base64-3.05.tar.gz I installed the result and then built MIME-tools-5.417 and didn't get its warning about an old MIME-Base64, so it seems to work so far. From cturner at pattern.net Thu May 5 03:55:53 2005 From: cturner at pattern.net (Chip Turner) Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 23:55:53 -0400 Subject: Overriding core Perl modules In-Reply-To: (Kenneth Porter's message of "Wed, 04 May 2005 16:57:35 -0700") References: <1DE837FA04C1837649B9AFC8@[10.169.6.246]> Message-ID: Kenneth Porter writes: > --On Monday, May 02, 2005 4:48 AM -0400 Chip Turner > wrote: > >> RPM-Specfile-1.19 is being uploaded to CPAN tonight. It contains this >> change (--use-usr-local, horrible name, alas) as well as the code to >> detect the name of the top level tarball. > > Just got to try this to update MIME-Base64 to 3.05 on FC2. The magic > command looks like this: > > cpanflute2 --buildall --use-usr-local --installdirs=site > MIME-Base64-3.05.tar.gz > > I installed the result and then built MIME-tools-5.417 and didn't get > its warning about an old MIME-Base64, so it seems to work so far. Awesome! Chip -- Chip Turner cturner at pattern.net From wtogami at redhat.com Sat May 14 08:04:22 2005 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 22:04:22 -1000 Subject: mod_perl 2.0.0 RC6 is out In-Reply-To: <42784F14.4020405@di.uminho.pt> References: <42784F14.4020405@di.uminho.pt> Message-ID: <4285B106.4030506@redhat.com> Jos? Pedro Oliveira wrote: > mod_perl 2.0.0 RC6 (aka 1.999_23) is out! > The update appears to be peaceful. > > Changelog > http://search.cpan.org/~stas/mod_perl-2.0.0-RC6/Changes > > Diff > http://search.cpan.org/diff?from=mod_perl-2.0.0-RC5&to=mod_perl-2.0.0-RC6 > > jpo Make a SRPM and prove that the deps between the current FC4 and this version didn't change. Then try to convince Sopwith that we should upgrade the version. Given the size of the diff I am guessing he would say no. Has anyone actually *tested* the current mod_perl in FC4? It would be a good reason to upgrade it if the current version is totally broken. Otherwise we should respect the version freeze and focus on the FC4Blocker list now. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From wtogami at redhat.com Sat May 14 08:21:45 2005 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 22:21:45 -1000 Subject: New bugmail proposal... Message-ID: <4285B519.8070701@redhat.com> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.devel On second thought, I am thinking it may not be too bad to auto-CC this mailing list on all perl* FC bugs. It works fairly well for spamassassin's development list. The perl* bug load is fairly small compared to spamassassin, and immediate notification to the group of all activity would help to keep everyone better informed. I am thinking to exclude a few types of bug mail like "I'm adding myself CC but not making a comment". There are many categories that can be disabled in the account bugmail preferences that I can experiment with. The security embargo thing isn't too much of a problem. We can just ask bressers not to clone the FC security bug until embargo is lifted, or maybe dkl can devise some way of excluding the list until embargo lifts automatically. Any objections to this? Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From jpo at di.uminho.pt Sat May 14 15:26:16 2005 From: jpo at di.uminho.pt (Jose Pedro Oliveira) Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 16:26:16 +0100 (WEST) Subject: mod_perl 2.0.0 RC6 is out (and CGI.pm 3.10) In-Reply-To: <4285B106.4030506@redhat.com> References: <42784F14.4020405@di.uminho.pt> <4285B106.4030506@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1094.213.13.86.117.1116084376.squirrel@webmail.lsd.di.uminho.pt> > Jos? Pedro Oliveira wrote: >> mod_perl 2.0.0 RC6 (aka 1.999_23) is out! >> The update appears to be peaceful. >> >> Changelog >> http://search.cpan.org/~stas/mod_perl-2.0.0-RC6/Changes >> >> Diff >> http://search.cpan.org/diff?from=mod_perl-2.0.0-RC5&to=mod_perl-2.0.0-RC6 >> >> jpo > > Make a SRPM and prove that the deps between the current FC4 and this > version didn't change. Then try to convince Sopwith that we should > upgrade the version. Given the size of the diff I am guessing he would > say no. Will open a ticket with the specfile update in a couple. > Has anyone actually *tested* the current mod_perl in FC4? It would be a > good reason to upgrade it if the current version is totally broken. > Otherwise we should respect the version freeze and focus on the > FC4Blocker list now. Even more important more important appears to the CGI.pm update, in particular the change from 3.09 to 3.10 (released a couple of hours ago. Can we push this update to with a new perl patch? Diff 3.08 -> 3.10 http://search.cpan.org/diff?from=CGI.pm-3.08&to=CGI.pm-3.10 Diff 3.09 -> 3.10 http://search.cpan.org/diff?from=CGI.pm-3.09&to=CGI.pm-3.10 (more information in the mod_perl mailing list) jpo -- Jos? Pedro Oliveira * mailto: jpo at di.uminho.pt * http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/~jpo * * gpg fingerprint = F9B6 8D87 859D 1C94 48F0 84C0 9749 9EB5 91BD 851B * From jpo at di.uminho.pt Sun May 15 03:09:48 2005 From: jpo at di.uminho.pt (Jose Pedro Oliveira) Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 04:09:48 +0100 (WEST) Subject: mod_perl 2.0.0 Preview is available for testing (was RC6) In-Reply-To: <4285B106.4030506@redhat.com> References: <42784F14.4020405@di.uminho.pt> <4285B106.4030506@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1146.213.13.91.138.1116126588.squirrel@webmail.lsd.di.uminho.pt> > Jos? Pedro Oliveira wrote: >> mod_perl 2.0.0 RC6 (aka 1.999_23) is out! >> The update appears to be peaceful. >> >> Changelog >> http://search.cpan.org/~stas/mod_perl-2.0.0-RC6/Changes >> >> Diff >> http://search.cpan.org/diff?from=mod_perl-2.0.0-RC5&to=mod_perl-2.0.0-RC6 >> >> jpo > > Make a SRPM and prove that the deps between the current FC4 and this > version didn't change. Then try to convince Sopwith that we should > upgrade the version. Given the size of the diff I am guessing he would > say no. > > Has anyone actually *tested* the current mod_perl in FC4? It would be a > good reason to upgrade it if the current version is totally broken. > Otherwise we should respect the version freeze and focus on the > FC4Blocker list now. A new, and hopefully the last, mod_perl 2.0.0 snapshot was announced today in the mod_perl mailing list. Quote from the announcement: --- #* Allright folks, RC6 was released a while ago, and various issues were resolved. According to our planned schedule, I am releasing a mod_perl-2.0.0 preview! As before, this is your last chance to affect the new API, since after 2.0.0 is released, incompatible API changes will not happen. So, one more time, test this tarball as much as possible. If all is well, this could become the official 2.0.0 release. *# --- Announcement: [ANNOUNCE] mod_perl 2.0.0 (preview!) http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modperl&m=111607986202275&w=2 I think it is better to wait for the final mod_perl 2.0.0 version and released it as an errata. jpo -- Jos? Pedro Oliveira * mailto: jpo at di.uminho.pt * http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/~jpo * * gpg fingerprint = F9B6 8D87 859D 1C94 48F0 84C0 9749 9EB5 91BD 851B * From wtogami at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:23:41 2005 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 13:23:41 -1000 Subject: New bugmail proposal... In-Reply-To: <4285B519.8070701@redhat.com> References: <4285B519.8070701@redhat.com> Message-ID: <428A7CFD.70204@redhat.com> Warren Togami wrote: > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.devel > > On second thought, I am thinking it may not be too bad to auto-CC this > mailing list on all perl* FC bugs. It works fairly well for > spamassassin's development list. The perl* bug load is fairly small > compared to spamassassin, and immediate notification to the group of all > activity would help to keep everyone better informed. > > I am thinking to exclude a few types of bug mail like "I'm adding myself > CC but not making a comment". There are many categories that can be > disabled in the account bugmail preferences that I can experiment with. > > The security embargo thing isn't too much of a problem. We can just ask > bressers not to clone the FC security bug until embargo is lifted, or > maybe dkl can devise some way of excluding the list until embargo lifts > automatically. > > Any objections to this? Nobody objected in 4 days, so I'm going ahead. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:30:55 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:30:55 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505172330.j4HNUt0K015536@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com -- 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. From wtogami at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:35:47 2005 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 13:35:47 -1000 Subject: ANNOUNCE: Bug Mail Message-ID: <428A7FD3.1070705@redhat.com> You are advised to edit your mail filters to filter fedora-perl-devel-list mail into a folder before you filter Bugzilla mail, if you want to avoid a bunch of duplicate mail in your bug folder. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From wtogami at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:38:35 2005 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 13:38:35 -1000 Subject: New bugmail proposal... In-Reply-To: <428A7CFD.70204@redhat.com> References: <4285B519.8070701@redhat.com> <428A7CFD.70204@redhat.com> Message-ID: <428A807B.7000108@redhat.com> Warren Togami wrote: > Warren Togami wrote: > >> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.devel >> >> On second thought, I am thinking it may not be too bad to auto-CC this >> mailing list on all perl* FC bugs. It works fairly well for >> spamassassin's development list. The perl* bug load is fairly small >> compared to spamassassin, and immediate notification to the group of >> all activity would help to keep everyone better informed. >> >> I am thinking to exclude a few types of bug mail like "I'm adding >> myself CC but not making a comment". There are many categories that >> can be disabled in the account bugmail preferences that I can >> experiment with. >> >> The security embargo thing isn't too much of a problem. We can just >> ask bressers not to clone the FC security bug until embargo is lifted, >> or maybe dkl can devise some way of excluding the list until embargo >> lifts automatically. >> >> Any objections to this? > > > Nobody objected in 4 days, so I'm going ahead. > I'm adding the "important looking" bugs to this list first with CC bugmail enabled. Then I'm mass adding everything else with moderate-bit enabled then discard to avoid a huge amount of useless mail. Then all future new bugs will automatically CC to this list. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:42:48 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:42:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 127023] perl fails "lib/FindBin" test (breaks MRTG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505172342.j4HNgmo7016995@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl fails "lib/FindBin" test (breaks MRTG) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=127023 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:44:13 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:44:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 127506] a memory leak has been confirmed on the perl 5.8.0 that ships with edge server In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505172344.j4HNiDai017229@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: a memory leak has been confirmed on the perl 5.8.0 that ships with edge server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=127506 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:47:13 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:47:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 135162] Strange error message when connecting to Bugzilla xml-rpc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505172347.j4HNlDS2017969@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Strange error message when connecting to Bugzilla xml-rpc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=135162 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|wtogami at redhat.com |dkl at redhat.com CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-17 19:47 EST ------- IIRC Bugzilla XML-RPC is currently broken on the server side? Anyone know the details? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:47:33 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:47:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 135975] Perl's 'study' function breaks regexp matching In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505172347.j4HNlXuE018035@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Perl's 'study' function breaks regexp matching https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=135975 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:51:33 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:51:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 145215] garbage after split() In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505172351.j4HNpXo4019077@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: garbage after split() https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=145215 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:52:12 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:52:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 144536] could not run system-config-printer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505172352.j4HNqCJO019249@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: could not run system-config-printer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=144536 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:52:29 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:52:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 147957] DBD-Pg core dumps when doing a select from a variable length array In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505172352.j4HNqT97019316@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: DBD-Pg core dumps when doing a select from a variable length array https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=147957 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:53:51 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:53:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 157695] CAN-2005-0448 perl File::Path.pm rmtree race condition In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505172353.j4HNrp2m019617@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: CAN-2005-0448 perl File::Path.pm rmtree race condition https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157695 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:56:36 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:56:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158036] New: perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505172356.j4HNua7r020440@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158036 Summary: perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 Product: Fedora Core Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: perl AssignedTo: cturner at redhat.com ReportedBy: jpo at di.uminho.pt QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com Description of problem: The current perl package includes a patch to update CGI.pm to version 3.08 (as required by mod_perl 2.0.0 RC5). Right now it makes sense to update CGI.pm to the latest CPAN version (3.10). These two latest releases correct mod_perl related problems. CGI.pm: diff from 3.08 to 3.10 http://search.cpan.org/diff?from=CGI.pm-3.08&to=CGI.pm-3.10 Note: CGI.pm 3.10 will be included in perl 5.8.7. Perl 5.8 devel branch: http://public.activestate.com/gsar/APC/perl-5.8.x/lib/CGI.pm ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-17 19:56 EST ------- Created an attachment (id=114492) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=114492&action=view) CGI.pm update: from version 3.08 to 3.10 -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 17 23:57:20 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:57:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 113304] perl should not export -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505172357.j4HNvKIh020607@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl should not export -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113304 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-17 19:57 EST ------- Do we still want to fix this? What possible bad effects might this cause to change it now? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 00:02:22 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 20:02:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158036] perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505180002.j4I02MPD021587@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158036 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-17 20:02 EST ------- In order to make the case for upgrading this during this freeze, you must demonstrate that the current version is horribly broken (exactly how?) and it makes no sense to backport the fix (the patch is too big or comprises the entire new upstream version?) -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 00:07:05 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 20:07:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 129726] hidden error in DB_File::untie causes file descriptor leak In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505180007.j4I075UB022397@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: hidden error in DB_File::untie causes file descriptor leak https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=129726 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 00:57:44 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 20:57:44 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158036] perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505180057.j4I0viwu030672@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158036 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-17 20:57 EST ------- You are not upgrading a full package: we will be adding a new patch to perl (or replace an existing one). 1) Strange errors have been reported the mod_perl mailling list: * Re: It did not QUITE work! Re: "strange error" is related to CGI.pm http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modperl&m=111601794202239&w=2 (17 messages) * CGI.pm 3.10 is on CPAN http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modperl&m=111602212309524&w=2 2) the diff from 3.08 to 3.10 is small: it only modifies two files i) three lines in the CGI module ii) a test file 3) the upgrade to mod_perl 2.0.0 RC5 (and later) _will_ break a lot of applications: while most CPAN mod_perl related modules have already been updated, there is at least one - HTML::Mason - that hasn't and won't be until the final version of mod_perl 2.0.0 is out (expected soon but we never know: mod_perl 2 has been in beta stage for at least three years); other modules will suffer more than one update to get things fixed (eg: CGI.pm). -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 02:49:30 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 22:49:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 127963] Provide changed from Encode::CN::HZ = 1.5 to Encode::CN::HZ = 1.05 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505180249.j4I2nUrq018283@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Provide changed from Encode::CN::HZ = 1.5 to Encode::CN::HZ = 1.05 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=127963 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-17 22:49 EST ------- You are probably right, but it is unlikely that anything is affected by this. This is the result of perl upstream's braindeadness. If any problems do result from this, there is nothing we can really do from our side. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 02:50:24 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 22:50:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 131821] Module for MIME Mail In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505180250.j4I2oOCR018451@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Module for MIME Mail https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=131821 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-17 22:50 EST ------- This has been Extras for a while. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 02:50:56 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 22:50:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 137719] Add libintl-perl package In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505180250.j4I2ouar019004@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Add libintl-perl package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=137719 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-17 22:50 EST ------- This has been in Extras since January. If you need it to be in Core then you must go through PM. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 02:51:39 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 22:51:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 140993] useless files included, incomplete h2ph, wrong files location, duplicate files... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505180251.j4I2pdo9019161@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: useless files included, incomplete h2ph, wrong files location, duplicate files... https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=140993 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-17 22:51 EST ------- Perl team, please check if any of this is still relevant. -- 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. From wtogami at redhat.com Wed May 18 07:51:48 2005 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 21:51:48 -1000 Subject: Why /usr/bin/sperl5.8.6 ? Message-ID: <428AF414.1050107@redhat.com> [perl-suidperl] file /usr/bin/sperl5.8.6 is a setuid binary Anyone have any idea why we ship this in perl-suidperl along with /usr/bin/suidperl? Without looking at the package, it seems odd to me why we ship that binary with a version-specific name. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From cturner at pattern.net Wed May 18 08:08:37 2005 From: cturner at pattern.net (Chip Turner) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 04:08:37 -0400 Subject: Why /usr/bin/sperl5.8.6 ? In-Reply-To: <428AF414.1050107@redhat.com> (Warren Togami's message of "Tue, 17 May 2005 21:51:48 -1000") References: <428AF414.1050107@redhat.com> Message-ID: We ship perl as /u/b/perl and /u/b/perl5.8.6; it's symmetry! Chip Warren Togami writes: > [perl-suidperl] file /usr/bin/sperl5.8.6 is a setuid binary > > Anyone have any idea why we ship this in perl-suidperl along with > /usr/bin/suidperl? Without looking at the package, it seems odd to me > why we ship that binary with a version-specific name. > > Warren Togami > wtogami at redhat.com > > -- > Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list > Fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list > -- Chip Turner cturner at pattern.net From wtogami at redhat.com Wed May 18 08:27:23 2005 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 22:27:23 -1000 Subject: Why /usr/bin/sperl5.8.6 ? In-Reply-To: References: <428AF414.1050107@redhat.com> Message-ID: <428AFC6B.9000107@redhat.com> Does anything actually depend on that existing? Is there any good reason for shipping it this way in both packages? Warren Chip Turner wrote: > We ship perl as /u/b/perl and /u/b/perl5.8.6; it's symmetry! > > Chip > > Warren Togami writes: > > >>[perl-suidperl] file /usr/bin/sperl5.8.6 is a setuid binary >> >>Anyone have any idea why we ship this in perl-suidperl along with >>/usr/bin/suidperl? Without looking at the package, it seems odd to me >>why we ship that binary with a version-specific name. >> >>Warren Togami >>wtogami at redhat.com >> >>-- >>Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list >>Fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com >>https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list >> > > From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 13:11:15 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 09:11:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 151801] spec file references /tmp/MANIFEST.all -- breaks multiuser rebuilds In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505181311.j4IDBFsc006732@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: spec file references /tmp/MANIFEST.all -- breaks multiuser rebuilds https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=151801 ------- Additional Comments From mattdm at mattdm.org 2005-05-18 09:11 EST ------- No, it's not -- was it set that way? However, it'd be a pretty easy fix: there's a line which says cp MANIFEST.all /tmp -- don't do that! As far as I can see, the file that's copied there isn't actually ever even used. (It doesn't seem to be referenced elsewhere in the file at all, and if I remove it, the resulting package is apparently the same.) -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 14:55:44 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 10:55:44 -0400 Subject: [Bug 151801] spec file creates (unused) /tmp/MANIFEST.all -- breaks multiuser rebuilds In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505181455.j4IEtiLk029497@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: spec file creates (unused) /tmp/MANIFEST.all -- breaks multiuser rebuilds https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=151801 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-18 10:55 EST ------- I could swear that I have read something about this in the last days but I don't remember where. I believe it said that the MANIFEST file in the /tmp directory was being used inside the building system (to pass information between building machines?). I think it is better to ping Chip Turner. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 15:18:53 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 11:18:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 151801] spec file creates (unused) /tmp/MANIFEST.all -- breaks multiuser rebuilds In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505181518.j4IFIrgT003053@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: spec file creates (unused) /tmp/MANIFEST.all -- breaks multiuser rebuilds https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=151801 ------- Additional Comments From cturner at pattern.net 2005-05-18 11:18 EST ------- nah nothing fancy, it's just a debug statement I left in accidentally when I needed to see the contents of MANIFEST from a build box. it can safely be removed. -- 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. From cturner at pattern.net Wed May 18 15:33:14 2005 From: cturner at pattern.net (Chip Turner) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 11:33:14 -0400 Subject: Why /usr/bin/sperl5.8.6 ? In-Reply-To: <428AFC6B.9000107@redhat.com> (Warren Togami's message of "Tue, 17 May 2005 22:27:23 -1000") References: <428AF414.1050107@redhat.com> <428AFC6B.9000107@redhat.com> Message-ID: I don't think anything uses it directly, no. I'd check scripts inside the perl package itself, just in case, but it probably is safe to leave off if they really offend you... but I doubt they're doing any harm and there is always the chance some user somewhere may be using them and would get annoyed :) Chip Warren Togami writes: > Does anything actually depend on that existing? Is there any good > reason for shipping it this way in both packages? > > Warren > > Chip Turner wrote: >> We ship perl as /u/b/perl and /u/b/perl5.8.6; it's symmetry! >> Chip >> Warren Togami writes: >> >>>[perl-suidperl] file /usr/bin/sperl5.8.6 is a setuid binary >>> >>>Anyone have any idea why we ship this in perl-suidperl along with >>>/usr/bin/suidperl? Without looking at the package, it seems odd to me >>>why we ship that binary with a version-specific name. >>> >>>Warren Togami >>>wtogami at redhat.com >>> >>>-- >>>Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list >>>Fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com >>>https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list >>> >> > > -- > Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list > Fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list > -- Chip Turner cturner at pattern.net From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 16:11:59 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 12:11:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158036] perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505181611.j4IGBxom014791@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158036 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-18 12:11 EST ------- Definitely worth applying before FC4, if you ask me. Re: comment 2: freeze? I thought the FC4 freeze starts on May 23rd. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2005-May/msg00096.html -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 18:12:17 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:12:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505181812.j4IICHcj006771@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 jakub at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEEDINFO ------- Additional Comments From jakub at redhat.com 2005-05-18 14:12 EST ------- Can you please: 1) try gcc4 -O{0,1} as well 2) do a binary search between objects built with gcc4 -O2 and a compiler with which it works to see which exact *.o file matters 3) in the debugger, see which functions from that .o file are called and where the problem could possibly happen and ideally 4) distill a self-contained testcase from it ? The fact that something works with older compiler and does not with a newer one does not imply a compiler bug, it more often actually is an application 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 21:52:59 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:52:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158036] perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505182152.j4ILqxMd002356@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158036 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-18 17:52 EST ------- Created an attachment (id=114539) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=114539&action=view) perl.spec patch: includes the CGI.pm update patch -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 22:13:32 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:13:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158036] perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505182213.j4IMDWka007590@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl: updating CGI.pm to 3.10 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158036 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-18 18:13 EST ------- this is already committed, waiting on rel-eng -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 18 22:31:20 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:31:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158132] (relnotes) perl binary compat symlinks removed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505182231.j4IMVKpc010153@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (relnotes) perl binary compat symlinks removed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158132 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu May 19 08:25:22 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 04:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 144167] system-config-printer hangs when new clicked In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505190825.j4J8PMN5017127@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: system-config-printer hangs when new clicked https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=144167 twaugh at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From twaugh at redhat.com 2005-05-19 04:25 EST ------- Yes, and that bug has a stack trace. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 144536 *** -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu May 19 08:25:34 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 04:25:34 -0400 Subject: [Bug 144536] could not run system-config-printer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505190825.j4J8PYlV017287@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: could not run system-config-printer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=144536 twaugh at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |a.patacchiola at comcast.net ------- Additional Comments From twaugh at redhat.com 2005-05-19 04:25 EST ------- *** Bug 144167 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu May 19 14:21:30 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 10:21:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505191421.j4JELUU5020165@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-19 10:21 EST ------- DBD-Pg test suite and gcc v4 ---------------------------- 1) gcc -O1: test suite fails 2) gcc -O0: test suite OK Only passes the test suite if compiled with -O0 make %{?_smp_mflags} \ OPTIMIZE="`echo $RPM_OPT_FLAGS | sed s/-O2/-O0/`" Note: tested with DBD-Pg-1.41 and DBD-Pg-1.41_2. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu May 19 16:21:01 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 12:21:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505191621.j4JGL1ib025596@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-19 12:20 EST ------- Confirmed, compiling with -O0 makes the test suite pass (which implies also that the placeholder problem is fixed by that). -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu May 19 20:52:04 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 16:52:04 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505192052.j4JKq4s3011408@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-19 16:51 EST ------- We are running out of time. I'll ship it with -O0 for now and keep the bug open for a real fix later. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu May 19 22:30:43 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 18:30:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505192230.j4JMUh02023496@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|(gcc4) perl-DBD-pg |(gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg |Placeholders no longer |Placeholders no longer |functioning |functioning Version|fc4test3 |devel ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-19 18:30 EST ------- http://people.redhat.com/wtogami/temp/perl-DBD-Pg/ Hmm... this is a bit odd. These changes happened when I did s/O2/OO/. Probably not a problem? [BAD] [perl-DBD-Pg] usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/DBD/Pg/Pg.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on i386 [BAD] [perl-DBD-Pg] usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/ia64-linux-thread-multi/auto/DBD/Pg/Pg.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on ia64 [BAD] [perl-DBD-Pg] usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/ppc-linux-thread-multi/auto/DBD/Pg/Pg.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on ppc [BAD] [perl-DBD-Pg] usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/s390-linux-thread-multi/auto/DBD/Pg/Pg.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on s390 [BAD] [perl-DBD-Pg] usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/ppc64-linux-thread-multi/auto/DBD/Pg/Pg.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on ppc64 [BAD] [perl-DBD-Pg] usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/s390x-linux-thread-multi/auto/DBD/Pg/Pg.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on s390x [BAD] [perl-DBD-Pg] usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/auto/DBD/Pg/Pg.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on x86_64 [VERIFY] [perl-DBD-Pg] RPM.requires libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) disappearing on ppc64 s390x x86_64 [VERIFY] [perl-DBD-Pg] RPM.requires libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4) disappearing on i386 ppc s390 [VERIFY] [perl-DBD-Pg] RPM.requires libc.so.6.1(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) disappearing on ia64 -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri May 20 20:16:29 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 16:16:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] New: mod_perl 2.0.0 is out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505202016.j4KKGTEZ016625@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 Summary: mod_perl 2.0.0 is out Product: Fedora Core Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: mod_perl AssignedTo: jorton at redhat.com ReportedBy: jpo at di.uminho.pt QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com Description of problem: mod_perl 2.0.0 is out Specfile changes: - Update to 2.0.0. - Requirement update: httpd >= 2.0.47. - New requirement: perl >= 3:5.8.6-14 (includes CGI.pm 3.10). ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-20 16:16 EST ------- Created an attachment (id=114651) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=114651&action=view) mod_perl specfile update -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 01:01:26 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 21:01:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] mod_perl 2.0.0 is out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505210101.j4L11QNK015824@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: mod_perl 2.0.0 is out https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-20 21:01 EST ------- Can this be released as a Fedora Core 4 errata? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 01:37:17 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 21:37:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505210137.j4L1bHjS018571@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|mod_perl 2.0.0 is out |[TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl | |2.0.0 Status|NEW |NEEDINFO ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-20 21:37 EST ------- http://people.redhat.com/wtogami/temp/mod_perl/ Joe Orton built binaries of this and I copied them here for testing. Please find people who actually use mod_perl to test this. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 02:53:56 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 22:53:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505210253.j4L2runT024407@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-20 22:53 EST ------- The requirements need to be updated: 1) httpd >= 2.0.47 (README and Makefile.PL file) 2) add perl >= 3:5.8.6-14 (for CGI.pm 3.10) See mod_perl specfile patch in comment #2. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 02:55:47 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 22:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505210255.j4L2tlf3024576@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-20 22:55 EST ------- Correction: patch in comment #1. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 07:50:53 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 03:50:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505210750.j4L7orW5017587@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-21 03:50 EST ------- I can help test on Monday. Anyway, I don't really like the suggested "perl >= 3:5.8.6-14 (for CGI.pm 3.10)" dependency. mod_perl does not need _any version_ of CGI.pm nor does it require Perl >= 5.8.6 as such. For example, I have a huge mod_perl app at work that, well, is a real mod_perl app, it does not use CGI.pm for anything. FC4 users will have a version of Perl installed that will satisfy the above dependency anyway, so "hardcoding" it will just make life slightly harder for example for folks who want to rebuild this locally on FC3. On the other hand, the bump in the versioned httpd dependency looks ok. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 09:24:39 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 05:24:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505210924.j4L9Odpc023944@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-21 05:24 EST ------- I am removing the new perl versioned dependency from -3. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 09:26:45 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 05:26:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505210926.j4L9Qj5q024080@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-21 05:26 EST ------- Requires: httpd-mmn = %([ -a %{_includedir}/httpd/.mmn ] && cat %{_includedir}/httpd/.mmn || echo missing) On second thought, isn't this adequate for a httpd dependency? The mmn number is supposed to be something about binary compatibilit with modules? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 09:59:53 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 05:59:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505210959.j4L9xrgJ028158@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-21 05:59 EST ------- AFAICS yep, from httpd changelog: * Tue Sep 03 2002 Joe Orton 2.0.40-6 - provide "httpd-mmn" to manage module ABI compatibility The versioned httpd build dep is good and should stay, though. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 10:38:30 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 06:38:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158383] New: Perl 5.8.7RC1 is out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505211038.j4LAcUrS030411@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158383 Summary: Perl 5.8.7RC1 is out Product: Fedora Core Version: devel Platform: All URL: http://www.cpan.org/pub/CPAN/authors/id/N/NW/NWCLARK/per l-5.8.7-RC1.tar.bz2 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: perl AssignedTo: wtogami at redhat.com ReportedBy: altblue at n0i.net QAContact: dkl at redhat.com CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com Looks like a good start for FC4 as it already integrates many fixes and modules updates that should ease fixing some of the current perl related problems in Fedora Core devel branch. Check out perldelta for details: http://search.cpan.org/~nwclark/perl-5.8.7-RC1/pod/perl587delta.pod Hm, as with the mod_perl 2.000_00 release, questions raise if these could be quickly integrated into the future FC4 release (along with rebuilding/updating all current perl related packages from FC - at least as to avoid "backward compatible" @INC pollution)... hope this could be feasible as IMHO it would make future perl related errata releases for FC4 much less painful, leaving the patch backporting trouble to Fedora Legacy team ;-) -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 15:05:17 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 11:05:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505211505.j4LF5H2T011348@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-21 11:05 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > ... > Anyway, I don't really like the suggested "perl >= 3:5.8.6-14 (for CGI.pm 3.10)" > dependency. mod_perl does not need _any version_ of CGI.pm nor does it require > Perl >= 5.8.6 as such. For example, I have a huge mod_perl app at work that, > well, is a real mod_perl app, it does not use CGI.pm for anything. > > FC4 users will have a version of Perl installed that will satisfy the above > dependency anyway, so "hardcoding" it will just make life slightly harder for > example for folks who want to rebuild this locally on FC3. > ... That's exactly why the perl dependency should be there. It would require ppl building mod_perl in FC3 (and RHEL4, ...) to read the mod_perl and perl packages changelogs before sucessfully installing it in ther distro. They would be warned that CGI.pm 3.10 comes _highly_ recommended. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 17:25:25 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 13:25:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505211725.j4LHPP4S020537@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-21 13:25 EST ------- Yes, it is always recommended to read the changelogs and docs but no, NOT required to rebuild or upgrade their Perl because of this. People who upgrade from mod_perl 1.99_xx to 2.0.0 (no matter on which distro version) without reading the docs are most likely in for a few nasty surprises anyway. Le me repeat, mod_perl does not need CGI.pm _at all_. An app that uses CGI.pm and wants to run under mod_perl should set its required versions appropriately, in its Perl code or rpm deps. It is not the business of the mod_perl package to inflict this on everyone. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 18:19:33 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 14:19:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158383] Perl 5.8.7RC1 is out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505211819.j4LIJX9l028170@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Perl 5.8.7RC1 is out https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158383 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-21 14:19 EST ------- 1) Perl 5.8.7 final is expected in less than one week Source: 5.8.7 RC1 announcement in use.perl.org http://use.perl.org/articles/05/05/20/123238.shtml?tid=6&tid=16 2) regarding mod_perl 2.0.0 The perl package has been patched to include CGI.pm 3.10 (5.8.6-14). The final mod_perl 2.0.0 version is expected to be in FC4. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 if you can help test it 3) @INC pollution. Yes. There are still half a dozen perl modules last built with perl 5.8.5. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 21 21:58:32 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 17:58:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158383] Perl 5.8.7RC1 is out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505212158.j4LLwW9T011688@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Perl 5.8.7RC1 is out https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158383 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-21 17:58 EST ------- #2 is not certain, rel-eng would need to approve it, and it is most likely they would reject it from FC4 final because it isn't release critical. If that is the case we will push it immediately as an update. #3 I don't consider this to be a problem. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun May 22 11:51:05 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 07:51:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505221151.j4MBp5vd009289@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-22 07:51 EST ------- 1.42 is out, fixes a number of problems but unfortunately not this one; s/O2/O0/ is still needed with it and gcc-4.0.0-8. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun May 22 12:06:29 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 08:06:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505221206.j4MC6TKo010300@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-22 08:06 EST ------- Some of these changes since the current rawhide version appear ... extremely odd or wrong. [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib/httpd/modules/mod_perl.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on i386 [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib/httpd/modules/mod_perl.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on ia64 [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib/httpd/modules/mod_perl.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on ppc [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib/httpd/modules/mod_perl.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on s390 [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib64/httpd/modules/mod_perl.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on x86_64 [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib64/httpd/modules/mod_perl.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on ppc64 [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib64/httpd/modules/mod_perl.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on s390x [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/ModPerl/Util/Util.so: library symbol disappeared from architecture i386: XS_ModPerl__Util_unload_package [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/ia64-linux-thread-multi/auto/ModPerl/Util/Util.so: library symbol disappeared from architecture ia64: XS_ModPerl__Util_unload_package [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/ppc-linux-thread-multi/auto/ModPerl/Util/Util.so: library symbol disappeared from architecture ppc: XS_ModPerl__Util_unload_package [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/s390-linux-thread-multi/auto/ModPerl/Util/Util.so: library symbol disappeared from architecture s390: XS_ModPerl__Util_unload_package [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/ppc64-linux-thread-multi/auto/ModPerl/Util/Util.so: library symbol disappeared from architecture ppc64: XS_ModPerl__Util_unload_package [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/s390x-linux-thread-multi/auto/ModPerl/Util/Util.so: library symbol disappeared from architecture s390x: XS_ModPerl__Util_unload_package [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/auto/ModPerl/Util/Util.so: library symbol disappeared from architecture x86_64: XS_ModPerl__Util_unload_package [BAD] [mod_perl-devel] Multilib regressions for /ppc/mod_perl-devel/usr/include/httpd/modperl_xs_sv_convert.h [BAD] [mod_perl-devel] Multilib regressions for /ppc64/mod_perl-devel/usr/include/httpd/modperl_xs_sv_convert.h [BAD] [mod_perl-devel] Multilib regressions for /s390/mod_perl-devel/usr/include/httpd/modperl_xs_sv_convert.h [BAD] [mod_perl-devel] Multilib regressions for /s390x/mod_perl-devel/usr/include/httpd/modperl_xs_sv_convert.h -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun May 22 12:09:13 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 08:09:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505221209.j4MC9DRG010430@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-22 08:09 EST ------- We can issue an FC4 update later when a real solution is found. Someone needs to do Jakub's suggestion in Comment #8. -- 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. From wtogami at redhat.com Sun May 22 21:38:01 2005 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 11:38:01 -1000 Subject: umask problems Message-ID: <4290FBB9.7060900@redhat.com> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73905 There are many perl* bugs for these umask problems, where installed packages are broken if the system umask is 077. Can someone verify if this is still a problem and close bugs that are fixed? Jose did your spec cleanups solve these problems? Thanks, Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From rc040203 at freenet.de Sun May 22 21:41:46 2005 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 23:41:46 +0200 Subject: umask problems In-Reply-To: <4290FBB9.7060900@redhat.com> References: <4290FBB9.7060900@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1116798107.27282.10.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 11:38 -1000, Warren Togami wrote: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73905 > > There are many perl* bugs for these umask problems, where installed > packages are broken if the system umask is 077. Can someone verify if > this is still a problem and close bugs that are fixed? No, we can't: Access Denied You are not authorized to access bug #73905. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun May 22 21:56:36 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 17:56:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 84671] should something obsolete perl-NDBM_File? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505222156.j4MLuaK8020692@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: should something obsolete perl-NDBM_File? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84671 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Product|Red Hat Linux |Fedora Core Version|9 |devel Component|perl |perl CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com Group|beta | ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-22 17:56 EST ------- I think this is still an issue, but should we bother fixing it? I suspect someone will hit it only if they upgrade from RH8 or RHEL2.1, which is highly likely to not work for other reasons. -- 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. From wtogami at redhat.com Sun May 22 22:01:20 2005 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 12:01:20 -1000 Subject: umask problems In-Reply-To: <1116798107.27282.10.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <4290FBB9.7060900@redhat.com> <1116798107.27282.10.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <42910130.9040404@redhat.com> Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 11:38 -1000, Warren Togami wrote: > >>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73905 >> >>There are many perl* bugs for these umask problems, where installed >>packages are broken if the system umask is 077. Can someone verify if >>this is still a problem and close bugs that are fixed? > > > No, we can't: > > Access Denied > You are not authorized to access bug #73905. > http://tinyurl.com/akfj8 Oops, fixed now. Here is a query that finds many of these. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 03:13:17 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 23:13:17 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505230313.j4N3DHgl008262@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|136450 |150222, 158504 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 06:29:54 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 02:29:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505230629.j4N6Ts0m025359@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: [TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-23 02:29 EST ------- [mod_perl-devel] Multilib regressions for /ppc/mod_perl-devel/usr/include/httpd/modperl_xs_sv_convert.h This means the .h file was identical in the old pacakge between ppc and ppc64, but now no longer is. [BAD] [mod_perl] usr/lib/httpd/modules/mod_perl.so lost -DFORTIFY_SOURCE on i386 Build logs show "-O2 -g -pipe -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=pentium4 -fasynchronous-unwind-tables" so there is some other cause for losing fortify source. -O0 of perl-DBD-Pg caused this, but this is some other issue. Another possible cause is if all static buffers became dynamic. Both of these issues need to be investigated and fixed before the FC4 update is issued. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 06:37:22 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 02:37:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505230637.j4N6bMu0026064@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|[TESTING NEEDED] mod_perl |mod_perl 2.0.0 |2.0.0 | OtherBugsDependingO| |158504 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 12:30:42 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 08:30:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 113304] perl should not export -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505231230.j4NCUg3J003244@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl should not export -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113304 ------- Additional Comments From jorton at redhat.com 2005-05-23 08:30 EST ------- Yes, it still needs to be fixed. It shouldn't cause any undesired side-effects. Fixing it is probably Hard, though. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 13:24:15 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 09:24:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156496] perl-Convert-TNEF - FC4 rebuild failed - build log missing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505231324.j4NDOFAm008503@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl-Convert-TNEF - FC4 rebuild failed - build log missing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156496 bugs.michael at gmx.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|FC4 rebuild failed - build |perl-Convert-TNEF - FC4 |log missing |rebuild failed - build log | |missing -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 17:07:00 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 13:07:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156496] perl-Convert-TNEF - FC4 rebuild failed - build log missing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505231707.j4NH70dH015693@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl-Convert-TNEF - FC4 rebuild failed - build log missing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156496 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WORKSFORME ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-23 13:06 EST ------- 0.17-4 builds fine on ppc. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 18:38:23 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 14:38:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158354] mod_perl 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505231838.j4NIcNEK003437@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: mod_perl 2.0.0 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158354 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-23 14:38 EST ------- Warren, Just rebuild mod_perl-2.0.0 in a i386 FC4test3+rawhide system without seeing the FORTIFY_SOURCE warn/error messages. RPMS: kernel-2.6.11-1.1340_FC4, rpm-4.4.1-20, gcc-4.0.0-8, perl-5.8.6-15 The only "strange" thing may be using -fpic and -fPIC at the same time. Can -fpic be safely dropped from the specfile (CFLAGS and OPTIMIZE) ? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 19:09:27 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 15:09:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505231909.j4NJ9RNt011495@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-23 15:09 EST ------- make %{?_smp_mflags} \ OPTIMIZE="`echo $RPM_OPT_FLAGS | sed s/-Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2//`" The test suite also runs without problems if I just remove the FORTIFY_SOURCE define. Does this implies a DPD::Pg bug (some kind of buffer overflow)? Where can I get more information about FORTIFY_SOURCE? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 19:38:58 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 15:38:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505231938.j4NJcwQi016385@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|jpo at di.uminho.pt | ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-23 15:38 EST ------- sed s/-Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2/-Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1/ The test suite also runs without problems with _FORTIFY_SOURCE=1. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 19:55:37 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 15:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 113304] perl should not export -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505231955.j4NJtb3w019351@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl should not export -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113304 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|fc1 |devel OtherBugsDependingO|108680 |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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 20:03:33 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 16:03:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505232003.j4NK3X4C020999@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|ville.skytta at iki.fi | ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-23 16:03 EST ------- (Removing personal Cc, I receive this traffic through the list...) -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 20:05:43 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 16:05:43 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505232005.j4NK5hmH021242@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-23 16:05 EST ------- warren: =2 and =1 aren't entirely identical =2 is changing some subtle behavior that I would consider a bug but the standards don't example struct foo { char buf[20]; int a;}; strcpy(foo->buf, "21 character long string...."); that is allowed with =1 but not with =2 Most likely this is FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 breaking on some bad code. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 23 20:09:58 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 16:09:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505232009.j4NK9wCQ021988@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From arjanv at redhat.com 2005-05-23 16:09 EST ------- there are one or two other subtle changes for example printf to %n formats needs to come from read only memory (or gettext) -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 24 00:50:28 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 20:50:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505240050.j4O0oS8c020158@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-23 20:50 EST ------- The gcc4/glibc/_FORTIFY_SOURCE buffer overflow protection appears to documented in this Jakub's email: [PATCH] Object size checking to prevent (some) buffer overflows http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-09/msg02055.html --------------------------------------------------------------- ... The intended use in glibc is that by default no protection is done, when the above GCC 4.0+ and -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1 is used at optimization level 1 and above, security measures that shouldn't change behaviour of conforming programs are taken. With -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 some more checking is added, but some conforming programs might fail. ... --------------------------------------------------------------- The last sentence in the above paragraph worries me. How many false positives were found? Does anyone know examples of some false positives? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 24 01:16:06 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 21:16:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505240116.j4O1G6im022240@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-23 21:15 EST ------- AFAIK very few instances were detected where =2 caused trouble, and those cases were considered to be poor coding to begin with. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 24 07:42:35 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 03:42:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505240742.j4O7gZAt024080@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From arjanv at redhat.com 2005-05-24 03:42 EST ------- Until know we have found one case, the example warren quoted me on above. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 24 10:05:19 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 06:05:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505241005.j4OA5JRA008445@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From jakub at redhat.com 2005-05-24 06:05 EST ------- It seems to be the dbd_st_prepare_statement routine in dbdimp.c that matters. If this routine is built with -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2, make test fails, with -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1 succeeds. It is irrelevant whether the other .o files are built with fortify 1 or 2, and similarly for other routines in dbdimp.c. But looking at the assembly difference, it is really minimal: --- /tmp/1 2005-05-24 11:29:49.000000000 +0200 +++ /tmp/2 2005-05-24 11:39:23.000000000 +0200 @@ -50,11 +50,13 @@ dbd_st_prepare_statement: # basic block 1 movl -32(%ebp), %edi # imp_dbh, movl 112(%edi), %eax # .prepare_number, .prepare_number - movl %eax, 8(%esp) # .prepare_number, + movl %eax, 16(%esp) # .prepare_number, leal .LC149 at GOTOFF(%ebx), %eax #, tmp109 - movl %eax, 4(%esp) # tmp109, + movl %eax, 12(%esp) # tmp109, + movl $-1, 8(%esp) #, + movl $1, 4(%esp) #, movl %edx, (%esp) # D.18444, - call sprintf at PLT # + call __sprintf_chk at PLT # movl 12(%ebp), %eax # imp_sth, movl 128(%eax), %edx # .prepare_name, temp.762 cld @@ -282,12 +284,14 @@ dbd_st_prepare_statement: ret .L1348: # basic block 27 - movl %eax, 12(%esp) # D.18478, - movl %edi, 8(%esp) # statement, + movl %eax, 20(%esp) # D.18478, + movl %edi, 16(%esp) # statement, leal .LC152 at GOTOFF(%ebx), %eax #, tmp140 - movl %eax, 4(%esp) # tmp140, + movl %eax, 12(%esp) # tmp140, + movl $-1, 8(%esp) #, + movl $1, 4(%esp) #, movl %edi, (%esp) # statement, - call sprintf at PLT # + call __sprintf_chk at PLT # .L1303: # basic block 28 movl 12(%esi), %esi # .nextseg, currseg.772 and I don't see how that would change things (__sprintf_chk (buf, 1, -1, ...) works like sprintf, except %n from writable memory is refused (but there is no %n in this case and format strings are in read-only memory) and -1 length means no length limit). 20(%esp) is still in the area used for outgoing arguments, %ebp - %esp is 72 bytes and the lowest variable is at -48(%ebp). The code quality of that routine is horrible, look e.g. at this junk line: imp_sth->prepare_name[strlen(imp_sth->prepare_name)]='\0'; -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 24 11:42:31 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 07:42:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505241142.j4OBgVh1018077@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 jakub at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From jakub at redhat.com 2005-05-24 07:42 EST ------- Ok, finally see the bug. I was mislead by looking at second sprintf in the routine, but that one is optimized out and there is a third one, which is bogus: if (currseg->placeholder) { sprintf(statement, "%s$%d", statement, currseg->placeholder); } You simply can't do this in C, see ISO C99, 7.19.6.6: If copying takes place between objects that overlap, the behavior is undefined. I certainly don't have time to rewrite this whole junk, so here is just a quick fix for this exact case, though someone please rewrite this, ideally from scratch. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 24 18:24:56 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 14:24:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505241824.j4OIOuL5007966@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-24 14:24 EST ------- Created an attachment (id=114790) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=114790&action=view) Eliminates the problem exposed by _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 24 18:33:42 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 14:33:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505241833.j4OIXgfI009000@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-24 14:33 EST ------- Created an attachment (id=114791) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=114791&action=view) perl-DBD-Pg specfile patch Could someone else review/comment the dbdimp.c patch? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 24 18:49:53 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 14:49:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505241849.j4OInrvx013224@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From jakub at redhat.com 2005-05-24 14:49 EST ------- That's complete overkill. If you look at the (very ugly) loop counting the execsize, there is room in statement buffer for that sprintf, so the patch I apparently forgot to provide is enough if all you care about is to make it work. --- dbdimp.c.jj 2005-04-06 16:40:20.000000000 -0400 +++ dbdimp.c 2005-05-24 07:40:21.000000000 -0400 @@ -1243,7 +1243,7 @@ int dbd_st_prepare_statement (sth, imp_s for (currseg=imp_sth->seg; NULL != currseg; currseg=currseg->nextseg) { strcat(statement, currseg->segment); if (currseg->placeholder) { - sprintf(statement, "%s$%d", statement, currseg->placeholder); + sprintf(strchr(statement, '\0'), "$%d", currseg->placeholder); } } Calling pow in a loop is insane though: /* The parameter itself: dollar sign plus digit(s) */ for (x=1; x<7; x++) { if (currseg->placeholder < pow(10,x)) break; } if (x>=7) croak("Too many placeholders!"); execsize += x+1; Guess e.g. #include and #define DBD_STRINGIFY_1(x) #x #define DBD_STRINGIFY(x) DBD_STRINGIFY_1 (x) execsize += strlen (DBD_STRINGIFY (INT_MAX)) + 2; would be far cheaper (well, assuming CHAR_BIT 8 one can write execsize += sizeof (int) * 3 + 2; as well). The strlen will be optimized out by the compiler (unlike the expensive pow calls). -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 24 21:41:42 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 17:41:42 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505242141.j4OLfguP018658@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-24 17:41 EST ------- Jakub, Thanks for the explanation and the new patch. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 24 21:57:26 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 17:57:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505242157.j4OLvQSP021501@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-24 17:57 EST ------- The sprintf statement in line 1677 should also be patched. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 24 22:00:59 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 18:00:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505242200.j4OM0xSr021791@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-24 18:00 EST ------- I'm not building anything until Ville (or somebody else from fpdl) reviews and approves it. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 25 19:35:44 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 15:35:44 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505251935.j4PJZi19024079@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl(Inline) duplication https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-25 15:35 EST ------- Recommendations? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 25 20:27:03 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 16:27:03 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505252027.j4PKR3Yo031326@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl(Inline) duplication https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-25 16:27 EST ------- --- perl-PDL.spec.241_11 2005-05-12 05:28:34.000000000 +0100 +++ perl-PDL.spec 2005-05-25 21:25:12.000000000 +0100 @@ -34,7 +34,15 @@ %patch0 -p1 -b .settings %patch1 -p1 -b .long -# Explicitly filter perl(Tk) +# Provides: explicitly filter perl(Inline) +cat <<__EOF__ > %{name}-findperlprovides +#!/bin/sh +/usr/lib/rpm/perl.prov $* | grep -v 'perl(Inline)' +__EOF__ +%define __perl_provides %{_builddir}/PDL-%{version}/%{name}-findperlprovides +chmod +x %{__perl_provides} + +# Requires: explicitly filter perl(Tk) cat <<__EOF__ > %{name}-findperlrequires #!/bin/sh /usr/lib/rpm/perl.req $* | grep -v 'perl(Tk)' -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 25 20:42:44 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 16:42:44 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505252042.j4PKgiNj001467@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl(Inline) duplication https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-25 16:42 EST ------- Note that if you just filter out the perl(Inline) Provides here, this package will after the change depend on the perl-Inline package which it did not do earlier, because the autogenerated perl(Inline) dependency will still be there. It should be verified if this is the right thing. Another cosmetic note: if one hardcodes /usr/lib/rpm/perl.(prov|req) and thus theoretically overrides the system rpmbuild configuration, the filter scripts could be separated into files of their own instead of embedding them in the specfile. On the other hand, since they're already embedded, /usr/lib/rpm/perl.(prov|req) could be replaced with %{__perl_provides} and %{__perl_requires} in the emitted scriptlets to make them automatically play nice with possible future rpm config changes. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 25 20:46:47 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 16:46:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505252046.j4PKklCx002451@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl(Inline) duplication https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-25 16:46 EST ------- Oh, and "$*" should be backslashified in the embedded scripts like "\$*", otherwise it won't end up in the output. Not that it would matter currently... -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 25 23:47:36 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 19:47:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505252347.j4PNlarS023384@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl(Inline) duplication https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-25 19:47 EST ------- PDL: provides/requires 1) provide: perl(Inline) Caused by the following hack in the file Inline/MakePdlppInstallable.pm ---------- package Inline::MakePdlppInstallable; # just a dummy package package Inline; #==================================================================== # override the original Inline::install method # to allow Inline::Pdlpp code to be installed ... ---------- The above comment goes on and explains why the hack is there. 2) The requirement perl(Inline) appears to be valid unless there is no interest in using Inline::Pdlpp. a) The Inline module is required by the module Inline::Pdlpp (file Inline/Pdlpp.pm) ---------- package Inline::Pdlpp; use strict; require Inline; ... ---------- b) From the Inline::Pdlpp documentation ---------- ... You never actually use Inline::Pdlpp directly. It is just a support module for using Inline.pm with PDL::PP. So the usage is always: use Inline Pdlpp => ...; ... ---------- Source: http://search.cpan.org/dist/PDL/Basic/Gen/Inline/Pdlpp.pm#Usage -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed May 25 23:50:01 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 19:50:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505252350.j4PNo1mb023640@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl(Inline) duplication https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-25 19:49 EST ------- Created an attachment (id=114859) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=114859&action=view) perl-PDL specfile patch: includes Ville's suggestions -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu May 26 01:13:36 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 21:13:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505260113.j4Q1Da1a003906@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl(Inline) duplication https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-25 21:13 EST ------- Rel-eng said this isn't a showstopper, so this goes into FC5. Does this actually cause trouble beyond "two packages are pulled in when you Require Inline"? I am guessing no, so this doesn't need to go into FC4 Updates either. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu May 26 01:41:56 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 21:41:56 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505260141.j4Q1fuKn007218@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl(Inline) duplication https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-25 21:41 EST ------- Also for FC5: * Update PDL to version 2.4.2 (2005-01) http://search.cpan.org/dist/PDL/ -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 06:06:10 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 02:06:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 157695] CAN-2005-0448 perl File::Path.pm rmtree race condition In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505280606.j4S66AnP020974@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: CAN-2005-0448 perl File::Path.pm rmtree race condition https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157695 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-28 02:05 EST ------- "Race condition in the rmtree function in File::Path.pm in Perl before 5.8.4 allows local users to create arbitrary setuid binaries" 5.8.4 means FC3 is unaffected because we have perl-5.8.5? Can someone confirm? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 06:30:21 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 02:30:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 129726] hidden error in DB_File::untie causes file descriptor leak In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505280630.j4S6ULOF025522@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: hidden error in DB_File::untie causes file descriptor leak https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=129726 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO OtherBugsDependingO|123268 | nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-28 02:30 EST ------- Is this still an issue in FC3, RHEL4, or FC4? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 06:46:51 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 02:46:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 73906] Does not work when installed with an umask of 077 and messes filesystem In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505280646.j4S6kpSe028356@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Does not work when installed with an umask of 077 and messes filesystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73906 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-28 02:46 EST ------- Still an issue in FC4? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 06:48:27 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 02:48:27 -0400 Subject: [Bug 73906] (perl-Bit-Vector) Does not work when installed with an umask of 077 and messes filesystem In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505280648.j4S6mRUu028478@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (perl-Bit-Vector) Does not work when installed with an umask of 077 and messes filesystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73906 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Does not work when installed|(perl-Bit-Vector) Does not |with an umask of 077 and |work when installed with an |messes filesystem |umask of 077 and messes | |filesystem -- 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. From wtogami at redhat.com Sat May 28 06:54:10 2005 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 20:54:10 -1000 Subject: umask problems In-Reply-To: <42910130.9040404@redhat.com> References: <4290FBB9.7060900@redhat.com> <1116798107.27282.10.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <42910130.9040404@redhat.com> Message-ID: <42981592.8010901@redhat.com> Warren Togami wrote: > > http://tinyurl.com/akfj8 > Oops, fixed now. Here is a query that finds many of these. > Could someone please verify the issues in this query? I suspect most of them are fixed now, but no time to analyze... Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 07:03:52 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 03:03:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505280703.j4S73qkD029563@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl(Inline) duplication https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-28 03:03 EST ------- ia64 build failure of this plus perl-PDL-2.4.2. All other archs succeeded build and tests. Please advise. t/dumper....................Fatal error: argument is probably not a piddle, or magic no overwritten. You're in trouble, guv: 195584 9360880 8181832 (in cleanup) Fatal error: argument is probably not a piddle, or magic no overwritten. You're in trouble, guv: 195488 9331696 9416000 (in cleanup) Fatal error: argument is probably not a piddle, or magic no overwritten. You're in trouble, guv: 195584 9360880 8181832 (in cleanup) Fatal error: argument is probably not a piddle, or magic no overwritten. You're in trouble, guv: 195632 9330992 9185776 dubious Test returned status 255 (wstat 65280, 0xff00) DIED. FAILED tests 6-16 Failed 11/16 tests, 31.25% okay t/gsl_interp................dubious Test returned status 0 (wstat 11, 0xb) DIED. FAILED tests 1-10 Failed 10/10 tests, 0.00% okay Summary: Failed 3/96 test scripts, 96.88% okay. 21/797 subtests failed, 97.37% okay. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 07:04:39 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 03:04:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505280704.j4S74dIR029653@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl(Inline) duplication https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |150221 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 07:26:32 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 03:26:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 60853] Perl doesn't look for modules in /usr/local In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505280726.j4S7QWqL031812@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Perl doesn't look for modules in /usr/local https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60853 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEEDINFO CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-28 03:26 EST ------- Still an issue in FC4? I think it isn't, but I would like confirmation. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 07:26:47 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 03:26:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 73906] (perl-Bit-Vector) Does not work when installed with an umask of 077 and messes filesystem In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505280726.j4S7QlM7031836@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (perl-Bit-Vector) Does not work when installed with an umask of 077 and messes filesystem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73906 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE Fixed In Version| |6.4-1 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-28 03:26 EST ------- Nope, Jose's cleanup fixed this. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 07:29:01 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 03:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 79360] Net::Ping succeeds regardless of port assignment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505280729.j4S7T1n5032033@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Net::Ping succeeds regardless of port assignment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79360 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-28 03:28 EST ------- Can someone test the script provided in this report and verify if this is still 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 07:29:28 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 03:29:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 78235] function 'split' affects value of variable '$1' when pattern is being used as a delimiter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505280729.j4S7TS17032089@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: function 'split' affects value of variable '$1' when pattern is being used as a delimiter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78235 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-28 03:29 EST ------- Can someone test the script & data provided in this report and verify if this is still 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 08:04:12 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 04:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Bug 159051] New: GET prints error message on http://www.britishairwaysband.com/veday.htm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505280804.j4S84Cla003970@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=159051 Summary: GET prints error message on http://www.britishairwaysband.com/veday.htm Product: Fedora Core Version: fc3 Platform: i386 URL: http://www.britishairwaysband.com/veday.htm OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: normal Component: perl-libwww-perl AssignedTo: wtogami at redhat.com ReportedBy: njh at bandsman.co.uk CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com >From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050513 Fedora/1.7.8-1.3.1 Description of problem: GET http://www.britishairwaysband.com/veday.htm says Parsing of undecoded UTF-16 at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.3/LWP/Protocol.pm line 114. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): perl-libwww-perl-5.79-5 How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. GET http://www.britishairwaysband.com/veday.htm 2. 3. Actual Results: This message appears Parsing of undecoded UTF-16 at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.3/LWP/Protocol.pm line 114. Expected Results: The message shouldn't have appeared. Additional info: -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 12:41:53 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 08:41:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 157695] CAN-2005-0448 perl File::Path.pm rmtree race condition In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505281241.j4SCfr3r031495@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: CAN-2005-0448 perl File::Path.pm rmtree race condition https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157695 bressers at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From bressers at redhat.com 2005-05-28 08:41 EST ------- Warren, I just took a look at the latest perl source, this issue has not been fixed by upstream. It's proving very hard to do right, which is probably why upstream hasn't done it yet. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat May 28 15:32:58 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 11:32:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 78235] function 'split' affects value of variable '$1' when pattern is being used as a delimiter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505281532.j4SFWwtb014052@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: function 'split' affects value of variable '$1' when pattern is being used as a delimiter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78235 ville.skytta at iki.fi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE Fixed In Version| |5.8.5-12.FC3 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta at iki.fi 2005-05-28 11:32 EST ------- perl-5.8.5-12.FC3 and perl-5.8.6-15 produce the expected results. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon May 30 16:23:18 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 12:23:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158132] (relnotes) perl binary compat symlinks removed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505301623.j4UGNIIx013158@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (relnotes) perl binary compat symlinks removed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158132 kwade at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From kwade at redhat.com 2005-05-30 12:23 EST ------- Included in final release notes for FC4 under 6. Package-Specific Notes 6.1. Basic Components 6.1.x Perl Binary Compat Symlinks Thanks for the note! -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 01:56:46 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 21:56:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158383] Perl 5.8.7 is out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505310156.j4V1uk67015694@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Perl 5.8.7 is out https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158383 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Perl 5.8.7RC1 is out |Perl 5.8.7 is out ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-30 21:56 EST ------- Perl 5.8.7 is out! http://search.cpan.org/~nwclark/perl-5.8.7/ PerlDelta (from 5.8.6) http://search.cpan.org/~nwclark/perl-5.8.7/pod/perl587delta.pod The main problem is that nothing has been uploaded to the CPAN master mirror for the last 24/36 hours. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 02:00:31 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 22:00:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 158383] Perl 5.8.7 is out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505310200.j4V20VZT016166@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Perl 5.8.7 is out https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158383 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |150222 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-30 22:00 EST ------- Not a huge problem, because we need to change many things and properly test the SRPM a bit before adding it to rawhide in order to avoid breaking things. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 02:04:07 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 22:04:07 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505310204.j4V247Nr016634@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|(gcc4 O1+) perl-DBD-pg |(gcc4 _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2) |Placeholders no longer |perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no |functioning |longer functioning ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-30 22:04 EST ------- dbdimp.c has just been patched upstream: http://gborg.postgresql.org/project/dbdpg/cvs/diff.php/dbdpg/dbdimp.c?r1=1.134&r2=1.136&ty=u -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 02:06:45 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 22:06:45 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505310206.j4V26jfY017017@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-30 22:06 EST ------- That exact patch is desired against the current SRPM or should we wait for the next upstream release? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 02:15:40 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 22:15:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505310215.j4V2Fed3017799@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2005-05-30 22:15 EST ------- It appears to be OK but I will test it today. How many days can the update be postponed? Until June 6th (-1) ? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 02:18:46 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 22:18:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 156840] (gcc4 _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505310218.j4V2Ikvj018166@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: (gcc4 _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2) perl-DBD-pg Placeholders no longer functioning https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=156840 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-30 22:18 EST ------- Anytime really. The FC4 version works fine, so we can afford to wait until the upstream release, and verify that it works properly. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 04:49:32 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 00:49:32 -0400 Subject: [Bug 100786] DateManip needs to use zoneinfo database for source of timezones In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505310449.j4V4nWUh002922@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: DateManip needs to use zoneinfo database for source of timezones https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100786 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO CC| |fedora-perl-devel- | |list at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-31 00:49 EST ------- Is this still an issue in FC4? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 04:50:54 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 00:50:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 128879] Break perl-libxml-enno into component CPAN modules In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505310450.j4V4osn9003105@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Break perl-libxml-enno into component CPAN modules https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=128879 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-31 00:50 EST ------- The key question here is, what is the benefit? Do those split out packages continue to get updates upstream? -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 04:52:14 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 00:52:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 142837] Need site-specific man page directory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505310452.j4V4qEk2003312@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Need site-specific man page directory https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=142837 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-31 00:52 EST ------- And upstream FHS and perl needs to set the standard. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 04:59:05 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 00:59:05 -0400 Subject: [Bug 84671] should something obsolete perl-NDBM_File? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505310459.j4V4x5Xc003981@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: should something obsolete perl-NDBM_File? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84671 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED OtherBugsDependingO| |150221 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-31 00:58 EST ------- Wouldn't hurt to add to FC5. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 05:06:35 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 01:06:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 134913] DBD-Pg silently dies on some queries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505310506.j4V56Z4q004750@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: DBD-Pg silently dies on some queries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=134913 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|DBD-Pg silently dies on some|DBD-Pg silently dies on some |queries |queries Status|NEEDINFO |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-31 01:06 EST ------- No response in 1 month. Assuming fixed. Open a new bug if this is still an issue in FC4. -- 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. From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue May 31 07:12:31 2005 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 09:12:31 +0200 Subject: [Bug 128879] Break perl-libxml-enno into component CPAN modules In-Reply-To: <200505310450.j4V4osn9003105@www.beta.redhat.com> References: <200505310450.j4V4osn9003105@www.beta.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1117523552.12828.27.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Tue, 2005-05-31 at 00:50 -0400, bugzilla at redhat.com wrote: > ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-31 00:50 EST ------- > The key question here is, what is the benefit? * Them not being split prevents updates of modules contained inside of the package. * Having package corresponding 1:1 to CPAN packages improves CPAN's interaction with RPM packages. > Do those split out packages continue to get updates upstream? Running cpan on FC3 tells some of the packages contained perl-libxml- enno had been updated. I.e. I would assume them to receiving updates. Ralf From ghenry at suretecsystems.com Tue May 31 08:46:59 2005 From: ghenry at suretecsystems.com (Gavin Henry) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 09:46:59 +0100 (BST) Subject: Bugs on perl related RPMS Message-ID: <50556.193.195.148.66.1117529219.squirrel@webmail.suretecsystems.com> Dear guys, I took over cpan2rpm and now these bugs have been filed: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158702 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158704 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158708 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158709 What is the procedure for patching code? Should I keep patches local to our RPM, our send them to the author and get a new release of the core package? Thanks. -- Kind Regards, Gavin Henry. Managing Director. T +44 (0) 1224 279484 M +44 (0) 7930 323266 F +44 (0) 1224 742001 E ghenry at suretecsystems.com Open Source. Open Solutions(tm). http://www.suretecsystems.com/ From wtogami at redhat.com Tue May 31 08:55:46 2005 From: wtogami at redhat.com (Warren Togami) Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 22:55:46 -1000 Subject: Bugs on perl related RPMS In-Reply-To: <50556.193.195.148.66.1117529219.squirrel@webmail.suretecsystems.com> References: <50556.193.195.148.66.1117529219.squirrel@webmail.suretecsystems.com> Message-ID: <429C2692.8070904@redhat.com> Gavin Henry wrote: > Dear guys, > > I took over cpan2rpm and now these bugs have been filed: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158702 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158704 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158708 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158709 > > > What is the procedure for patching code? > > Should I keep patches local to our RPM, our send them to the author and > get a new release of the core package? > In the short term it is easier to just patch our Extras package and rebuild into the repository, but be sure you also try to get the patches into upstream, so *somebody else* maintains it in the long term instead of you. What do you mean by "core package"? Is this Core or Extras? If it is core, prep a SRPM for me, post it and assign the bug to me and I'll apply to Core CVS and build. Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com From ghenry at suretecsystems.com Tue May 31 09:06:02 2005 From: ghenry at suretecsystems.com (Gavin Henry) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 10:06:02 +0100 (BST) Subject: Bugs on perl related RPMS In-Reply-To: <429C2692.8070904@redhat.com> References: <50556.193.195.148.66.1117529219.squirrel@webmail.suretecsystems.com> <429C2692.8070904@redhat.com> Message-ID: <52109.193.195.148.66.1117530362.squirrel@webmail.suretecsystems.com> > Gavin Henry wrote: >> Dear guys, >> >> I took over cpan2rpm and now these bugs have been filed: >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158702 >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158704 >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158708 >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158709 >> >> >> What is the procedure for patching code? >> >> Should I keep patches local to our RPM, our send them to the author and >> get a new release of the core package? >> > > In the short term it is easier to just patch our Extras package and > rebuild into the repository, but be sure you also try to get the patches > into upstream, so *somebody else* maintains it in the long term instead > of you. Fine. > > What do you mean by "core package"? Is this Core or Extras? I mean the main software, i.e. cpan2rpm, not cire Fedora. > > If it is core, prep a SRPM for me, post it and assign the bug to me and > I'll apply to Core CVS and build. > > Warren Togami > wtogami at redhat.com > > -- > Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list > Fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list > From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 10:18:52 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 06:18:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 127023] perl fails "lib/FindBin" test (breaks MRTG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505311018.j4VAIqnK016402@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl fails "lib/FindBin" test (breaks MRTG) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=127023 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |159190 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 10:21:20 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 06:21:20 -0400 Subject: [Bug 127023] perl fails "lib/FindBin" test (breaks MRTG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505311021.j4VALKfx016944@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl fails "lib/FindBin" test (breaks MRTG) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=127023 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|145411 | 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 10:40:30 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 06:40:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 157695] CAN-2005-0448 perl File::Path.pm rmtree race condition In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505311040.j4VAeU7N019963@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: CAN-2005-0448 perl File::Path.pm rmtree race condition https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157695 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-31 06:40 EST ------- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=114350 Attachment to fix this security bug is from Ubuntu, but we require help cleaning it up and testing before issuing a FC3 update. Apparently this is a difficult problem to fix, and this is our second attempt doing so. =( -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 10:42:09 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 06:42:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 137215] Webmin Users and Groups Button causes this In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505311042.j4VAg97c020274@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Webmin Users and Groups Button causes this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=137215 wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2005-05-31 06:41 EST ------- Sorry, we are unable to fix issues in FC1 perl. -- 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. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue May 31 12:15:57 2005 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 08:15:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 142837] Need site-specific man page directory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200505311215.j4VCFvFe001958@www.beta.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Need site-specific man page directory https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=142837 ------- Additional Comments From mattdm at mattdm.org 2005-05-31 08:15 EST ------- They already have: /usr/local : Local hierarchy Purpose The /usr/local hierarchy is for use by the system administrator when installing software locally. It needs to be safe from being overwritten when the system software is updated. It may be used for programs and data that are shareable amongst a group of hosts, but not found in /usr. -- 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.