From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jun 1 14:39:29 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2007 10:39:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242065] New: perl-CGI-Session is not available in FE6 Message-ID: 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=242065 Summary: perl-CGI-Session is not available in FE6 Product: Fedora Extras Version: fc6 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: low Component: perl-CGI-Session AssignedTo: andreas at bawue.net ReportedBy: jeff at ocjtech.us QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com Description of problem: perl-CGI-Session is not available in Fedora Extras 6. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. yum install perl-CGI-Session Actual results: # rpm -q perl-CGI-Session package perl-CGI-Session is not installed # yum install perl-CGI-Session Loading "installonlyn" plugin Setting up Install Process Setting up repositories Reading repository metadata in from local files Parsing package install arguments Nothing to do Expected results: perl-CGI-Session gets installed. 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 rnorwood at redhat.com Fri Jun 1 21:01:26 2007 From: rnorwood at redhat.com (Robin Norwood) Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:01:26 -0400 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel Message-ID: Hi, This patch will remove the Requires that were placed on perl-devel at the end of the f7 cycle. It is proposed for the 'devel' branch (f8). Comments? (Ok, actually the patch is already applied, but I haven't built anything yet.) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: remove_devel_requires.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 1358 bytes Desc: remove Requires URL: -------------- next part -------------- -RN -- Robin Norwood Red Hat, Inc. "The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone." -Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching From jpo at di.uminho.pt Sat Jun 2 15:14:15 2007 From: jpo at di.uminho.pt (Jose Pedro Oliveira) Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:14:15 +0100 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> Robin Norwood wrote: > Hi, > > This patch will remove the Requires that were placed on perl-devel at > the end of the f7 cycle. It is proposed for the 'devel' branch (f8). > Comments? If that breaks the assumption that all perl core modules are installed by default, I am against (and you already know the reasons). jpo -- Jos? Pedro Oliveira * mailto:jpo at di.uminho.pt * http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/members/jpo/ * From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jun 2 17:08:14 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2007 13:08:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242249] New: syntax error in perl5db.pl Message-ID: 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=242249 Summary: syntax error in perl5db.pl Product: Fedora Core Version: fc6 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: perl AssignedTo: rnorwood at redhat.com ReportedBy: ihok at hotmail.com CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com Unmatched right curly bracket at (eval 48)[/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/perl5db.pl:628] line 5, at end of line syntax error at (eval 48)[/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/perl5db.pl:628] line 5, near "; }" Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): perl-5.8.8-10 -- 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 cweyl at alumni.drew.edu Sat Jun 2 19:42:11 2007 From: cweyl at alumni.drew.edu (Chris Weyl) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2007 12:42:11 -0700 Subject: an orphan! Message-ID: <7dd7ab490706021242p566a73edl9d8c71f028e4109d@mail.gmail.com> So I notice we have an orphan.... Anyone want to give String::Ediff a good home? I hear it's housebroken and stable. http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/fedora/extras-orphan___fedoraproject_dt_org.html -Chris -- Chris Weyl Ex astris, scientia From rc040203 at freenet.de Sun Jun 3 08:03:45 2007 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 10:03:45 +0200 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel In-Reply-To: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> References: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> Message-ID: <1180857826.12595.516.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 16:14 +0100, Jose Pedro Oliveira wrote: > Robin Norwood wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This patch will remove the Requires that were placed on perl-devel at > > the end of the f7 cycle. It is proposed for the 'devel' branch (f8). > > Comments? +1 > If that breaks the assumption that all perl core modules are installed > by default, I am against (and you already know the reasons). And you know that I disagree with you. Ralf From jpazdziora at redhat.com Sun Jun 3 12:04:49 2007 From: jpazdziora at redhat.com (Jan Pazdziora) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 14:04:49 +0200 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel In-Reply-To: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> References: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> Message-ID: <20070603120449.GA2925@odol.adelton.com> On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 04:14:15PM +0100, Jose Pedro Oliveira wrote: > > > > This patch will remove the Requires that were placed on perl-devel at > > the end of the f7 cycle. It is proposed for the 'devel' branch (f8). > > Comments? > > If that breaks the assumption that all perl core modules are installed > by default, I am against (and you already know the reasons). Will the net effect be that the core modules will not be installed, or just the fact that they get installed via independent rpm (and thus upgradable independently)? -- Jan Pazdziora | adelton at #satellite*, #brno Satellite Sustaining Engineering, Red Hat From rnorwood at redhat.com Mon Jun 4 14:42:54 2007 From: rnorwood at redhat.com (Robin Norwood) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 10:42:54 -0400 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel In-Reply-To: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> (Jose Pedro Oliveira's message of "Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:14:15 +0100") References: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> Message-ID: Jose Pedro Oliveira writes: > Robin Norwood wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This patch will remove the Requires that were placed on perl-devel at >> the end of the f7 cycle. It is proposed for the 'devel' branch (f8). >> Comments? > > If that breaks the assumption that all perl core modules are installed > by default, I am against (and you already know the reasons). Well, how about a compromise - for F7, we added perl-devel to the package groups in comps.xml so that it was installed by default whenever perl was installed. This if course meant that these other packages were pulled in also. When we break the Requires on the other packages, we could add them to comps.xml alongside perl-devel. This way the default install would be 'all perl core modules', but one could easily remove the devel-related bits either at kickstart time (- in the %packages section) or post-install. What do you think about this? Ralf? Others? -RN -- Robin Norwood Red Hat, Inc. "The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone." -Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching From rnorwood at redhat.com Mon Jun 4 14:44:02 2007 From: rnorwood at redhat.com (Robin Norwood) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 10:44:02 -0400 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel In-Reply-To: <20070603120449.GA2925@odol.adelton.com> (Jan Pazdziora's message of "Sun, 3 Jun 2007 14:04:49 +0200") References: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> <20070603120449.GA2925@odol.adelton.com> Message-ID: Jan Pazdziora writes: > On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 04:14:15PM +0100, Jose Pedro Oliveira wrote: >> > >> > This patch will remove the Requires that were placed on perl-devel at >> > the end of the f7 cycle. It is proposed for the 'devel' branch (f8). >> > Comments? >> >> If that breaks the assumption that all perl core modules are installed >> by default, I am against (and you already know the reasons). > > Will the net effect be that the core modules will not be installed, or > just the fact that they get installed via independent rpm (and thus > upgradable independently)? If we manipulate comps.xml as I suggest in another post, we could include them by default whenever perl is installed. Otherwise they would not be installed unless specified. -RN -- Robin Norwood Red Hat, Inc. "The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone." -Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching From cweyl at alumni.drew.edu Mon Jun 4 16:08:05 2007 From: cweyl at alumni.drew.edu (Chris Weyl) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 09:08:05 -0700 Subject: Fedora to CPAN mapping... In-Reply-To: <7dd7ab490705302156u764602bfy53c5d9ef1d8b2d37@mail.gmail.com> References: <7dd7ab490705212132r4dd406c2h398486764b351a99@mail.gmail.com> <7dd7ab490705222107i654b8915x56cee1e06b782c2c@mail.gmail.com> <20070527004351.GG27084@chicks.net> <7dd7ab490705281125p44dbbbccge4b1ab890eefde8c@mail.gmail.com> <1180377943.6254.415.camel@localhost.localdomain> <7dd7ab490705291116y5399a468xa249afaa4c59ef77@mail.gmail.com> <20070530165651.GC23735@chicks.net> <7dd7ab490705301251t4087ad74p335e37a9b290c528@mail.gmail.com> <20070530201246.GD7250@chicks.net> <7dd7ab490705302156u764602bfy53c5d9ef1d8b2d37@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7dd7ab490706040908p3e1139bdn139fe2e5bdb7c3db@mail.gmail.com> On 5/30/07, Chris Weyl wrote: > I just found http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/ProjectHosting; > hopefully someone on fedora-devel-list will be able to tell me how to > actually invoke the new project process :) So, little status update. I've exchanged some email with Jesse Keating about this, sounds like the project hosting infrastructure is still in beta. An increasingly used beta, but still... :) However, it does sound like we may be able to get a "perl SIG infrastructure" project up and going. Once that happens, I'll import the code I've been working on to generate the status pages. -Chris -- Chris Weyl Ex astris, scientia From rnorwood at redhat.com Mon Jun 4 19:21:38 2007 From: rnorwood at redhat.com (Robin Norwood) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 15:21:38 -0400 Subject: Archive::Zip - 'unauthorized' release. Message-ID: Hi, I started working down Chris's excellent list of outdated modules, and came upon an interesting situation with Archive::Zip - the latest version (1.18) is flagged as 'unauthorized'. As near as I can tell, the new author (Adam Kennedy) seems to have taken over maintaining this module, but hasn't had the ownership transferred in CPAN. I sent Adam an email asking if he is going to fix this. Is there a general policy for this sort of situation, and if not, should there be? I think clearly we would want to avoid downloading such releases - part of the intent is to prevent people from uploading releases when they don't own the module, and obvious badness could occur if someone uploaded an unauthorized release with some sort of badness in the code. I don't think that's what's going on here (Adam owns quite a few modules on CPAN, and clearly has a track record). Should something be added to the perl packaging guidelines, and what do you think we should do in this instance, other than wait for a response from Adam? The latest 'authorized' version: http://search.cpan.org/~smpeters/Archive-Zip-1.16/ Adam's 'unauthorized' version: http://search.cpan.org/~adamk/Archive-Zip-1.18/ -RN -- Robin Norwood Red Hat, Inc. "The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone." -Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching From tibbs at math.uh.edu Mon Jun 4 19:34:37 2007 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: 04 Jun 2007 14:34:37 -0500 Subject: Archive::Zip - 'unauthorized' release. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>>>> "RN" == Robin Norwood writes: RN> Is there a general policy for this sort of situation, and if not, RN> should there be? I'm not sure we could make one. When upstream forks (or pseudo-forks as seems to have happened here), we're going to have to figure out what to do on a case-by-case basis. RN> Should something be added to the perl packaging guidelines, I don't see that any of the basic issues are perl-specific. RN> and what do you think we should do in this instance, other than RN> wait for a response from Adam? Well, I think we should always try to stay well-informed as to the state of the upstream developers and in good communication with them. It never hurts to ask them what's up and get their opinions on what we should be doing with their packages. - J< From rnorwood at redhat.com Mon Jun 4 20:15:40 2007 From: rnorwood at redhat.com (Robin Norwood) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:15:40 -0400 Subject: Archive::Zip - 'unauthorized' release. In-Reply-To: (Jason L. Tibbitts, III's message of "04 Jun 2007 14:34:37 -0500") References: Message-ID: Jason L Tibbitts III writes: >>>>>> "RN" == Robin Norwood writes: > > RN> Is there a general policy for this sort of situation, and if not, > RN> should there be? > > I'm not sure we could make one. When upstream forks (or pseudo-forks > as seems to have happened here), we're going to have to figure out > what to do on a case-by-case basis. > > RN> Should something be added to the perl packaging guidelines, > > I don't see that any of the basic issues are perl-specific. Well, I was thinking something along the lines of "if a package is flagged as 'unauthorized' in CPAN, don't take it until you figure out why and verify that it is legitimate." But maybe that is assumed to be common sense. :-) -RN -- Robin Norwood Red Hat, Inc. "The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone." -Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching From jpo at di.uminho.pt Mon Jun 4 21:05:39 2007 From: jpo at di.uminho.pt (Jose Pedro Oliveira) Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 22:05:39 +0100 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel In-Reply-To: <20070603120449.GA2925@odol.adelton.com> References: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> <20070603120449.GA2925@odol.adelton.com> Message-ID: <46647EA3.7000601@di.uminho.pt> Jan Pazdziora wrote: > On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 04:14:15PM +0100, Jose Pedro Oliveira wrote: >>> This patch will remove the Requires that were placed on perl-devel at >>> the end of the f7 cycle. It is proposed for the 'devel' branch (f8). >>> Comments? >> If that breaks the assumption that all perl core modules are installed >> by default, I am against (and you already know the reasons). > > Will the net effect be that the core modules will not be installed, or Several core modules - CPAN, ExtUtils::MakeMaker, Test::* - wouldn't be installed and that would make life miserable for some people. A couple of examples: * users wouldn't be able to install perl modules in their homedirs as CPAN/ExtUtils::MakeMaker/Test::* aren't there. This is particular critical in computer labs (at least here). * people that has to maintain/install perl applications in heterogeneous systems (several linux distros, macosx, win32, ...) wouldn't be able to run their installations scripts, run test code, etc. (again in some systems you don't have access to the root/system account). * all perl specfiles would have to be modified/reviewed in order to start adding the splitted perl core modules to their build requirements list (a big waste of packagers time). > just the fact that they get installed via independent rpm (and thus > upgradable independently)? > Several perl core modules have already been splitted. As you can see the current perl specfile already generates the following rpms: perl-5.8.8-18.fc7.i386.rpm perl-CPAN-1.76_02-18.fc7.i386.rpm perl-devel-5.8.8-18.fc7.i386.rpm perl-ExtUtils-Embed-1.26-18.fc7.i386.rpm perl-ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.30-18.fc7.i386.rpm perl-libs-5.8.8-18.fc7.i386.rpm perl-suidperl-5.8.8-18.fc7.i386.rpm perl-Test-Harness-2.56-18.fc7.i386.rpm perl-Test-Simple-0.62-18.fc7.i386.rpm The splitted core modules should be independently upgradable. jpo -- Jos? Pedro Oliveira * mailto:jpo at di.uminho.pt * http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/members/jpo/ * From cweyl at alumni.drew.edu Mon Jun 4 22:19:43 2007 From: cweyl at alumni.drew.edu (Chris Weyl) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 15:19:43 -0700 Subject: Archive::Zip - 'unauthorized' release. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7dd7ab490706041519k7aa09e48s71d3ec6fdf253671@mail.gmail.com> On 6/4/07, Robin Norwood wrote: > Well, I was thinking something along the lines of "if a package is > flagged as 'unauthorized' in CPAN, don't take it until you figure out > why and verify that it is legitimate." But maybe that is assumed to be > common sense. :-) Sounds fairly commonsensical to me. One thing I usually do when updating modules is to review the diff between the version in Fedora and the released version. (Off "tools" on the search.cpan.org dist page or the "diff" link on the modules version page.) It gives me a good idea if I can expect the BR's to change, and what's going on... I'd definitely add a good hard look at the diff if the dist page said 'UNAUTHORIZED' in big red letters :) -Chris -- Chris Weyl Ex astris, scientia From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jun 4 22:41:15 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 18:41:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 240640] Please update In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706042241.l54MfFAm015815@bugzilla.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: Please update https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240640 drees76 at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |drees76 at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From drees76 at gmail.com 2007-06-04 18:41 EST ------- I would also like to see perl-File-RsyncP updated to 0.68 from the current 0.62 that is available. -- 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 altblue at n0i.net Mon Jun 4 23:57:17 2007 From: altblue at n0i.net (Marius Feraru) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 02:57:17 +0300 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel In-Reply-To: References: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> Message-ID: <4664A6DD.4020907@n0i.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Robin Norwood wrote: > When we break the Requires on the other packages, we could add them to > comps.xml alongside perl-devel. This way the default install would be > 'all perl core modules', but one could easily remove the devel-related > bits either at kickstart time (- in the %packages section) > or post-install. "Default" ("base") install is already super-hyper-bloated. I'd avoid cluttering it even more. OTOH, you could go "classic", in a similar way like, for instance, in order to be able to build a gtk2 dependent app you need (among others) the "gtk-devel" package. So, you could alleviate this by adding (artificial) dependencies to the "perl-devel" package in order to bring up *all* "core Perl" packages. For the current split status, this should feel quite ok, as all those packages have a "developerish" nature: %package devel ... Requires: perl(CPAN) Requires: perl(ExtUtils::Embed) Requires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) Requires: perl(Test::Harness) Requires: perl(Test::Simple) 'HTH - -- Marius Feraru -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iD8DBQFGZKbdtZHp/AYZiNkRAt6MAJ4+gC77Mi4tNfGKI6Y1HzhPYv/o9wCg9WGa ZVLtVHXtd64gHlO88bMKDq4= =UTxS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From rc040203 at freenet.de Tue Jun 5 04:53:26 2007 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 06:53:26 +0200 Subject: Archive::Zip - 'unauthorized' release. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1181019206.27239.30.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 15:21 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote: > Hi, > > I started working down Chris's excellent list of outdated modules, and > came upon an interesting situation with Archive::Zip - the latest > version (1.18) is flagged as 'unauthorized'. As near as I can tell, the > new author (Adam Kennedy) seems to have taken over maintaining this > module, but hasn't had the ownership transferred in CPAN. Which just seems to have happened ;) > I sent Adam > an email asking if he is going to fix this. > > Is there a general policy for this sort of situation, and if not, should > there be? I think clearly we would want to avoid downloading such > releases - part of the intent is to prevent people from uploading > releases when they don't own the module, and obvious badness could occur > if someone uploaded an unauthorized release with some sort of badness in > the code. I don't think that's what's going on here (Adam owns quite a > few modules on CPAN, and clearly has a track record). > > Should something be added to the perl packaging guidelines, and what do > you think we should do in this instance, other than wait for a response > from Adam? Release 1.20 ;) Adam just (Today, 2007-06-05) seems to have officially released 1.20 see: http://search.cpan.org/~adamk/Archive-Zip-1.20/ Ralf From rnorwood at redhat.com Tue Jun 5 14:14:20 2007 From: rnorwood at redhat.com (Robin Norwood) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 10:14:20 -0400 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel In-Reply-To: <4664A6DD.4020907@n0i.net> (Marius Feraru's message of "Tue, 05 Jun 2007 02:57:17 +0300") References: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> <4664A6DD.4020907@n0i.net> Message-ID: Marius Feraru writes: > Robin Norwood wrote: >> When we break the Requires on the other packages, we could add them to >> comps.xml alongside perl-devel. This way the default install would be >> 'all perl core modules', but one could easily remove the devel-related >> bits either at kickstart time (- in the %packages section) >> or post-install. > > "Default" ("base") install is already super-hyper-bloated. I'd avoid > cluttering it even more. Well, this isn't adding anything - we simply wouldn't be removing things that, as Jose points out, are considered part of the core perl distribution, and many people would be upset to find missing. > OTOH, you could go "classic", in a similar way like, for instance, in order > to be able to build a gtk2 dependent app you need (among others) the > "gtk-devel" package. > > So, you could alleviate this by adding (artificial) dependencies to the > "perl-devel" package in order to bring up *all* "core Perl" packages. > > For the current split status, this should feel quite ok, as all those > packages have a "developerish" nature: > > %package devel > ... > Requires: perl(CPAN) > Requires: perl(ExtUtils::Embed) > Requires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) > Requires: perl(Test::Harness) > Requires: perl(Test::Simple) This is exactly what we're doing now (for f7), but I'd rather not have artificial dependencies. -RN -- Robin Norwood Red Hat, Inc. "The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone." -Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching From rnorwood at redhat.com Tue Jun 5 14:15:58 2007 From: rnorwood at redhat.com (Robin Norwood) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 10:15:58 -0400 Subject: Archive::Zip - 'unauthorized' release. In-Reply-To: <1181019206.27239.30.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> (Ralf Corsepius's message of "Tue, 05 Jun 2007 06:53:26 +0200") References: <1181019206.27239.30.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: Ralf Corsepius writes: > On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 15:21 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote: >> Hi, [...] > Release 1.20 ;) > > Adam just (Today, 2007-06-05) seems to have officially released 1.20 > see: http://search.cpan.org/~adamk/Archive-Zip-1.20/ Ask, and ye shall receive. I'll build that one later today. Thanks, -RN -- Robin Norwood Red Hat, Inc. "The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone." -Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jun 5 16:42:48 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 12:42:48 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242249] bug reading from socket in perl5db.pl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706051642.l55GgmLa014256@bugzilla.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: bug reading from socket in perl5db.pl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242249 ihok at hotmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|syntax error in perl5db.pl |bug reading from socket in | |perl5db.pl ------- Additional Comments From ihok at hotmail.com 2007-06-05 12:42 EST ------- This only seems like a syntax error, but it's really a runtime bug. Note that it has been fixed on upstream 5.9.x trunk, but not on 5.8.8 branch: http://public.activestate.com/cgi-bin/perlbrowse/28510 Could we install that patch on Fedora? Not sure what Perl is in F7, but don't forget FC6, please. -- 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 Jun 5 20:35:13 2007 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 22:35:13 +0200 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel In-Reply-To: References: <46618947.2000300@di.uminho.pt> Message-ID: <1181075716.11785.18.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 10:42 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote: > Jose Pedro Oliveira writes: > > > Robin Norwood wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> This patch will remove the Requires that were placed on perl-devel at > >> the end of the f7 cycle. It is proposed for the 'devel' branch (f8). > >> Comments? > > > > If that breaks the assumption that all perl core modules are installed > > by default, I am against (and you already know the reasons). > > Well, how about a compromise - for F7, we added perl-devel to the > package groups in comps.xml so that it was installed by default whenever > perl was installed. This if course meant that these other packages were > pulled in also. When we break the Requires on the other packages, we > could add them to comps.xml alongside perl-devel. This way the default > install would be 'all perl core modules', but one could easily remove > the devel-related bits either at kickstart time (- in the > %packages section) or post-install. > > What do you think about this? > > Ralf? Others? Well, I seem to be stumbling from one pit-fall into the next. To me, comps.xml is completely meaningless, because it is not of any relevance to rpm. I.e. if some people think, it's helpful to them, so be it. Wrt. Jos?'s point: In a nutshell he says, "he expects a monolytic perl and doesn't want to change his habits" - At this point, any discussion is moot. IMO, it would be best to add a meta-package "e.g. perl-devel" which would pull in all split out modules. Ralf From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jun 5 21:58:02 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 17:58:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242810] New: perl-Net-Server: repoclosure problem because perl-IO-Multiplex is not available Message-ID: 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=242810 Summary: perl-Net-Server: repoclosure problem because perl-IO- Multiplex is not available Product: Fedora EPEL Version: el4 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: high Priority: medium Component: perl-Net-Server AssignedTo: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net ReportedBy: bjohnson at symetrix.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com Description of problem: perl-Net-Server depends on perl-IO-Multiplex but perl-IO-Multiplex is not available for el4. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): perl-Net-Server-0.96-1.el4 How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. yum install perl-Net-Server 2. or yum update if it's already installed 3. Actual results: # yum update Setting up Update Process Setting up repositories Reading repository metadata in from local files Resolving Dependencies --> Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait. ---> Package perl-Net-Server.noarch 0:0.96-1.el4 set to be updated --> Running transaction check --> Processing Dependency: perl(IO::Multiplex) for package: perl-Net-Server --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Missing Dependency: perl(IO::Multiplex) is needed by package perl-Net-Server -- 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 Jun 6 13:12:38 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 09:12:38 -0400 Subject: [Bug 241251] perl-SOAP-Lite does not install due to missing dependencies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706061312.l56DCcS8018871@bugzilla.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-SOAP-Lite does not install due to missing dependencies https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241251 dzrudy at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE Fixed In Version| |perl-SOAP-Lite-0.68-5.el5 ------- Additional Comments From dzrudy at gmail.com 2007-06-06 09:12 EST ------- It is now fixed with perl-SOAP-Lite-0.68-5. Closing. -- 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 Jun 6 14:41:36 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:41:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242926] New: Need perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps Message-ID: 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=242926 Summary: Need perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps Product: Fedora Extras Version: fc6 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: low Component: perl-Email-Reply AssignedTo: tcallawa at redhat.com ReportedBy: jwb at redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com Description of problem: perl-Email-Reply not present in EPEL 5, preventing bugzilla package from installing. Also need EPEL versions of perl-Email-Send, perl-Email-MIME-Attachment-Stripper, perl-Template-Toolkit Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): all How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. yum install bugzilla in EPEL 5 2. 3. Actual results: failed deps Expected results: successful install 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 Wed Jun 6 14:44:06 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:44:06 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242926] Need perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706061444.l56Ei6kG028958@bugzilla.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 perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242926 jwb at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |241206 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 Wed Jun 6 14:48:31 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:48:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242929] New: Need perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps Message-ID: 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=242929 Summary: Need perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps Product: Fedora Extras Version: fc6 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: low Component: perl-MIME-tools AssignedTo: paul at city-fan.org ReportedBy: jwb at redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #242926 +++ Description of problem: perl-MIME-tools not present in EPEL 5, preventing bugzilla package from installing. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): all How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. yum install bugzilla in EPEL 5 2. 3. Actual results: failed deps Expected results: successful install 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 Wed Jun 6 14:50:23 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:50:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242929] Need perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706061450.l56EoNRJ029683@bugzilla.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 perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242929 jwb at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |241206 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 Wed Jun 6 14:57:31 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:57:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242931] New: Need perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps Message-ID: 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=242931 Summary: Need perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps Product: Fedora Extras Version: fc6 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: low Component: perl-Email-Simple AssignedTo: jpo at di.uminho.pt ReportedBy: jwb at redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com Description of problem: perl-Email-Simple not present in EPEL 5, preventing bugzilla package from installing. Also need EPEL versions of perl-Email-MIME-Modifier, perl-Email-Address, perl-Email-MIME Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): all How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. yum install bugzilla in EPEL 5 2. 3. Actual results: failed deps Expected results: successful install 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 Wed Jun 6 14:58:25 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:58:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242931] Need perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706061458.l56EwPGP030722@bugzilla.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 perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242931 jwb at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |241206 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 Wed Jun 6 15:08:14 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 11:08:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242929] Need perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706061508.l56F8ECC032142@bugzilla.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 perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242929 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora EPEL Version|fc6 |el5 Component|perl-MIME-tools |bugzilla ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2007-06-06 11:08 EST ------- perl-MIME-tools and its dependency perl-IO-stringy have already been built for EL-5 by mmcgrath and are in the needsign queue: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=33981 http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=33983 -- 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 Jun 6 15:36:53 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 11:36:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242941] New: perl-GDGraph3d: URL incorrect Message-ID: 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=242941 Summary: perl-GDGraph3d: URL incorrect Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: low Component: perl-GDGraph3d AssignedTo: jpo at di.uminho.pt ReportedBy: cweyl at alumni.drew.edu QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com Looks like the distribtion name changed circa 0.58. The URL currently listed in the spec is: http://search.cpan.org/dist/GDGraph3d/ The correct URL is http://search.cpan.org/dist/GD-Graph3d/ Certainly not a big deal, just figured I'd pass it along :) -- 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 cweyl at alumni.drew.edu Wed Jun 6 20:45:18 2007 From: cweyl at alumni.drew.edu (Chris Weyl) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 13:45:18 -0700 Subject: tests as documentations. Message-ID: <7dd7ab490706061345h6c175691s821ef9d7aba070bb@mail.gmail.com> Lately I've started realizing that the test suite of a distribution can make for excellent examples of how to use something. E.g. lots of the Catalyst and CGI-* dists include little "test apps" that exercise the various modules; Moose and Class-MOP both contain extensive test suites (with Moose going so far as to say "the tests are still the best documentation" for certain features), etc, etc. Even for something as mundane as Module::Use I found constraints on the module that weren't mentioned in the documentation. So, I've started packaging the test suites under %doc (in new packages and as I have reason to update existing packages), taking pains (as always) to deliver them without dependencies and execute bits. This seemed rather logical to me, as I've always included other docs (examples/*, doc/*, etc) in %doc and insisted on it in package reviews. I'm trying to package them up without regards to _my_ thinking they're useful, as what I think isn't useful someone else usually does (and that other person is typically me 6 months in the future). I figured I'd do it for a while, see what feedback I got, then come here and seek more feedback, and maybe put something in PackagingDrafts/Perl to address a best practice concerning it. (I already have a "tests can make good documentation... consider packaging them" in there, with no screams to date.) So. Here's what I've been hearing: 1. Questions mainly related to why the change in practice on my part, e.g. "why? ... oh, ok." 2. "Well, it's your package, it's in %doc and conforms to guidelines" 3. Test suites ought to be executable, and have all their deps met. #1 was the most popular, followed by #2. One person strongly feels #3, and doesn't appear to buy the "tests make good docs" argument under any circumstances. As near as I can tell, most people don't seem to really care one way or the other. As things stand, I'm inclined to go forward with "encourage optionally packaging t/ in %docs, following guidelines (no exec, no deps; split to -docs if the end package is too large)", but I see a couple different ways this could go as well. What do you all think? -Chris -- Chris Weyl Ex astris, scientia From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jun 7 02:01:46 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 22:01:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242941] perl-GDGraph3d: URL incorrect In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706070201.l5721kUh001902@bugzilla.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-GDGraph3d: URL incorrect https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242941 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2007-06-06 22:01 EST ------- Thanks for the report. Package updated and rebuilt for F-8 (devel). jpo -- 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 chicks at chicks.net Thu Jun 7 16:26:54 2007 From: chicks at chicks.net (Christopher Hicks) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 12:26:54 -0400 Subject: tests as documentations. In-Reply-To: <7dd7ab490706061345h6c175691s821ef9d7aba070bb@mail.gmail.com> References: <7dd7ab490706061345h6c175691s821ef9d7aba070bb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070607162654.GC27599@chicks.net> On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 01:45:18PM -0700, Chris Weyl wrote: > So. Here's what I've been hearing: > > 1. Questions mainly related to why the change in practice on my part, > e.g. "why? ... oh, ok." > 2. "Well, it's your package, it's in %doc and conforms to guidelines" > 3. Test suites ought to be executable, and have all their deps met. > > #1 was the most popular, followed by #2. One person strongly feels > #3, and doesn't appear to buy the "tests make good docs" argument > under any circumstances. As near as I can tell, most people don't > seem to really care one way or the other. > > As things stand, I'm inclined to go forward with "encourage optionally > packaging t/ in %docs, following guidelines (no exec, no deps; split > to -docs if the end package is too large)", but I see a couple > different ways this could go as well. > > What do you all think? Some way to run the test suite would cure my last gripe with replacing CPAN.pm with rpms. Having the files under %doc is fine, but include a script (exec'd or not) that installs dependant rpms for the test, sets the permissions usefully, and then runs the test suite. Having them there as docs is good and all, but not having some semipainless standard mechanism for making that more useful would be sad. Another solutions would be to split out a test package with the dependancies elucidated, but my sense is that that sort of thing doesn't follow the spirit people are doing things in rpmland these days. My sense may be wrong, but if it isn't why is that? -- "The problem with troubleshooting is that trouble shoots back!" From cweyl at alumni.drew.edu Thu Jun 7 17:44:33 2007 From: cweyl at alumni.drew.edu (Chris Weyl) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 10:44:33 -0700 Subject: tests as documentations. In-Reply-To: <20070607162654.GC27599@chicks.net> References: <7dd7ab490706061345h6c175691s821ef9d7aba070bb@mail.gmail.com> <20070607162654.GC27599@chicks.net> Message-ID: <7dd7ab490706071044s18cd747euae0b973d22f1b65b@mail.gmail.com> On 6/7/07, Christopher Hicks wrote: > On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 01:45:18PM -0700, Chris Weyl wrote: > > What do you all think? > > Some way to run the test suite would cure my last gripe with replacing CPAN.pm with rpms. Having the files under %doc is fine, but include a script (exec'd or not) that installs dependant rpms for the test, sets the permissions usefully, and then runs the test suite. Having them there as docs is good and all, but not having some semipainless standard mechanism for making that more useful would be sad. > > Another solutions would be to split out a test package with the dependancies elucidated, but my sense is that that sort of thing doesn't follow the spirit people are doing things in rpmland these days. My sense may be wrong, but if it isn't why is that? To be honest, I'd kinda like to see something along these lines as well. I've been sticking to my mantra of "tests can make good docs" -- because they do -- but it is awfully nice to be able to "cd %doc; prove t/*.t" and show the dist working as expected, using the same test suite the buildsys used. Or, to be tested at all -- some packages have display/network deps that can't be satisfied in mock and are conditionally disabled. ...or require login ids (a la WWW::Myspace) for the full suite. So what would be a good way to do something like this? Brain dump follows: 1. little README.t also in %doc, saying something like "you need Test::More, run as prove -I t/lib t/*.t" 2. little (non-exec scriptie) in %doc to do much the same 3. split tests into a -test subpackage, with deps et al and a little scriptie derived from {Makefile,Build}.PL 4. a totally separate package that knows where to find tests and handles kicking them off #1 would seem to be the easiest. If we do anything beyond 1 & 2, I suspect we're going to get some pressure to move them out of %doc (which is just fine). #3 I'm not a fan of; it would seem to have the greatest work for the least return.... plus decentralize the logic. #4 I'm a fan of. Another package providing a way to "discover" and use tests included via other packages... makes it easy to 1) optionally include tests as tests in packages (whereever they're installed), 2) update the framework easily, and 3) provide a consistent interface. That all being said, #0 would be: "prove t/*.t" still works nicely in most cases :) -Chris -- Chris Weyl Ex astris, scientia From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jun 7 20:01:36 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 16:01:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 241651] perl-DBI should be updated... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706072001.l57K1amg027181@bugzilla.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-DBI should be updated... https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241651 rnorwood at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE Fixed In Version| |1.56 ------- Additional Comments From rnorwood at redhat.com 2007-06-07 16:01 EST ------- Done for rawhide (F8). I don't think we want to do this for F7. -- 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 Jun 8 08:26:31 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 04:26:31 -0400 Subject: [Bug 241651] perl-DBI should be updated... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706080826.l588QV2r018815@bugzilla.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-DBI should be updated... https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241651 ------- Additional Comments From oliver at linux-kernel.at 2007-06-08 04:26 EST ------- Great. For rawhide this is just good. For a stable release like F7, it's not suitable - of course. Thx! Maybe this should be added to the release notes!? -- 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 Jun 8 19:03:58 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 15:03:58 -0400 Subject: [Bug 212369] Use of uninitialized value in pattern match In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706081903.l58J3wQb024143@bugzilla.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: Use of uninitialized value in pattern match https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212369 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium wtogami at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO Flag| |needinfo?(tjb at unh.edu) ------- Additional Comments From wtogami at redhat.com 2007-06-08 15:03 EST ------- Is this still an issue with the latest FC6 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 Fri Jun 8 19:07:29 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 15:07:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 212369] Use of uninitialized value in pattern match In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706081907.l58J7TbR024929@bugzilla.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: Use of uninitialized value in pattern match https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212369 tjb at unh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?(tjb at unh.edu) | ------- Additional Comments From tjb at unh.edu 2007-06-08 15:07 EST ------- My logs look clean. Seems fixed to me. -- 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 Jun 11 05:31:39 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 01:31:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 237252] minor error in amavis-clamd.conf In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706110531.l5B5VdFo026814@bugzilla.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: minor error in amavis-clamd.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237252 nicku at nicku.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nicku at nicku.org ------- Additional Comments From nicku at nicku.org 2007-06-11 01:31 EST ------- After making what might seem a reasonable change: $ diff /etc/clamd.d/amavisd.conf~ /etc/clamd.d/amavisd.conf 2c2 < LogSyslog --- > LogSyslog 1 14c14 < FixStaleSocket --- > FixStaleSocket 1 I find clamd *still* is unhappy: $ sudo service clamd.amavisd start Starting clamd.amavisd: Running as user amavis (UID 105, GID 107) and in /var/log/maillog: Jun 11 15:29:37 www3 clamd[30966]: Log file size limited to 1048576 bytes. Jun 11 15:29:37 www3 clamd[30966]: Reading databases from /var/lib/clamav Jun 11 15:29:37 www3 clamd[30966]: Not supported data format and then clamd dies. -- 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 Jun 11 07:20:39 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 03:20:39 -0400 Subject: [Bug 237252] minor error in amavis-clamd.conf In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706110720.l5B7KdJO030630@bugzilla.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: minor error in amavis-clamd.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237252 ------- Additional Comments From nicku at nicku.org 2007-06-11 03:20 EST ------- I've been able to restart clamd.amavisd after setting up freshclam and /etc/freshclam. The daily.cvd file seems to have been corrupted, even though rpm -V clamav-update showed no errors. After replacing it using freshclam, clamd can start, and finally I can receive email again. -- 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 Jun 11 14:42:25 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 10:42:25 -0400 Subject: [Bug 207838] Perl getsockopt() on SCTP sockets doesn't work In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706111442.l5BEgPFT010039@bugzilla.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 getsockopt() on SCTP sockets doesn't work https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207838 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium ------- Additional Comments From nhorman at redhat.com 2007-06-11 10:42 EST ------- This seems like a kernel bug to me. We're checking all our getsockopt values for != sizeof(option) rather than for < sizeof(option), and we should be returning ENOBUFS, rather than EINVAL (or silently truncating the result as POSIX indicates). -- 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 Jun 12 09:20:35 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 05:20:35 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242929] Need perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706120920.l5C9KZWf019100@bugzilla.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 perl modules in FC/FE added to EPEL to satisfy deps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242929 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2007-06-12 05:20 EST ------- Packages are now available in the repository: http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/epel/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 Tue Jun 12 09:27:23 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 05:27:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 243832] New: perl & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? Message-ID: 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=243832 Summary: perl & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? Product: Fedora Core Version: f7 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: low Component: perl AssignedTo: rnorwood at redhat.com ReportedBy: vnpenguin at gmail.com CC: fedora-perl-devel- list at redhat.com,rc040203 at freenet.de,tcallawa at redhat.com Description of problem: mod_perl-devel is a dependency of perl Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): perl-5.8.8-18.fc7 mod_perl-devel.i386 2.0.3-7 How reproducible: yum deplist perl Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Have to install mod_perl-devel and a lot of unwanted *-devel package for Perl. This is definitively unwanted. Expected results: mod_perl-devel is NOT needed for standard Perl !!! 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 Tue Jun 12 10:25:11 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 06:25:11 -0400 Subject: [Bug 243832] perl & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706121025.l5CAPBMf024598@bugzilla.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 & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243832 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|perl |mod_perl ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2007-06-12 06:25 EST ------- The bug here is in mod_perl, which should not "provide" perl(warnings) -- 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 Jun 12 13:01:16 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:01:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 243832] perl & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706121301.l5CD1G5U004669@bugzilla.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 & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243832 mcepl at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|mod_perl |perl ------- Additional Comments From mcepl at redhat.com 2007-06-12 09:01 EST ------- Cannot reproduce here with FC7 (x86_64?: [matej at hubmaier ~]$ rpm -qa mod_per\* [matej at hubmaier ~]$ rpm -q perl perl-5.8.8-18.fc7 [matej at hubmaier ~]$ and [matej at hubmaier ~]$ sudo yum deplist perl |grep -C 3 mod_perl dependency: perl(warnings) provider: perl.i386 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 provider: perl.x86_64 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 provider: mod_perl-devel.x86_64 2.0.3-7 provider: mod_perl-devel.i386 2.0.3-7 dependency: perl(Pod::Usage) provider: perl.i386 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 provider: perl.x86_64 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 -- dependency: perl(warnings) provider: perl.i386 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 provider: perl.x86_64 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 provider: mod_perl-devel.x86_64 2.0.3-7 provider: mod_perl-devel.i386 2.0.3-7 dependency: perl(Pod::Usage) provider: perl.i386 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 provider: perl.x86_64 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 [matej at hubmaier ~]$ which means IMHO that this dependency will be preferably satisfied by perl package itself. -- 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 Jun 12 13:22:53 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:22:53 -0400 Subject: [Bug 243832] perl & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706121322.l5CDMrRR006815@bugzilla.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 & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243832 paul at city-fan.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|perl |mod_perl ------- Additional Comments From paul at city-fan.org 2007-06-12 09:22 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Cannot reproduce here with FC7 (x86_64?: > > [matej at hubmaier ~]$ rpm -qa mod_per\* > [matej at hubmaier ~]$ rpm -q perl > perl-5.8.8-18.fc7 > [matej at hubmaier ~]$ > > and > > [matej at hubmaier ~]$ sudo yum deplist perl |grep -C 3 mod_perl > dependency: perl(warnings) > provider: perl.i386 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 > provider: perl.x86_64 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 > provider: mod_perl-devel.x86_64 2.0.3-7 > provider: mod_perl-devel.i386 2.0.3-7 > dependency: perl(Pod::Usage) > provider: perl.i386 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 > provider: perl.x86_64 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 > -- > dependency: perl(warnings) > provider: perl.i386 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 > provider: perl.x86_64 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 > provider: mod_perl-devel.x86_64 2.0.3-7 > provider: mod_perl-devel.i386 2.0.3-7 > dependency: perl(Pod::Usage) > provider: perl.i386 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 > provider: perl.x86_64 4:5.8.8-18.fc7 > [matej at hubmaier ~]$ > > which means IMHO that this dependency will be preferably satisfied by perl > package itself. In theory that is correct, and traditional yum behaviour has always been to choose the package with the shortest name in the event of multiple packages providing a dependency, hence perl would be preferred to mod_perl-devel. However, there have been many reports of packages with longer names being selected in F7, and this would appear to be an instance of this. It could probably be worked around by doing: # yum --exclude=mod_perl-devel install perl but surely nobody would deny that having mod_perl-devel provide perl(warnings) is a 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 Tue Jun 12 13:36:33 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:36:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 243832] perl & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706121336.l5CDaXVU008014@bugzilla.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 & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243832 tcallawa at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|rnorwood at redhat.com |jorton at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2007-06-12 09:36 EST ------- Yes, I'm sure that having mod_perl-devel provide perl(warnings) is a 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 Tue Jun 12 14:52:51 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:52:51 -0400 Subject: [Bug 228429] mod_perl errantly provides perl(warnings) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706121452.l5CEqpWx017233@bugzilla.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 errantly provides perl(warnings) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228429 cweyl at alumni.drew.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|fc6 |f7 Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Keywords| |Reopened Resolution|RAWHIDE | ------- Additional Comments From cweyl at alumni.drew.edu 2007-06-12 10:52 EST ------- This problem persists in F-7, however it's not mod_perl-devel which provides perl(warnings). -- 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 Jun 12 14:53:26 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:53:26 -0400 Subject: [Bug 243832] perl & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706121453.l5CErQmd017344@bugzilla.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 & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243832 cweyl at alumni.drew.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- BugsThisDependsOn| |228429 Bug 243832 depends on bug 228429, which changed state. Bug 228429 Summary: mod_perl errantly provides perl(warnings) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228429 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|RAWHIDE | Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From cweyl at alumni.drew.edu 2007-06-12 10:53 EST ------- I filed a bug against mod_perl providing perl(warnings) a while ago; it was marked closed/rawhide: bug 228429. I'm reopening. -- 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 Jun 12 14:53:28 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:53:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 228429] mod_perl errantly provides perl(warnings) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706121453.l5CErSen017392@bugzilla.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 errantly provides perl(warnings) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228429 cweyl at alumni.drew.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |243832 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 Jun 12 15:06:55 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:06:55 -0400 Subject: [Bug 228429] mod_perl errantly provides perl(warnings) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706121506.l5CF6tp0019457@bugzilla.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 errantly provides perl(warnings) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228429 cweyl at alumni.drew.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From cweyl at alumni.drew.edu 2007-06-12 11:06 EST ------- Err -- rather, it _is_ mod_perl-devel, not the main mod_perl package, which errantly provides perl(warnings). mod_perl-devel-2.0.3-7.i386.rpm, in the F-7 release, has this bug. However, -9, in updates, doesn't. Soo... it is fixed, but unlikely to help those installing right off the bat. -- 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 Jun 12 15:06:59 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:06:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 243832] perl & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706121506.l5CF6xFl019520@bugzilla.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 & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243832 Bug 243832 depends on bug 228429, which changed state. Bug 228429 Summary: mod_perl errantly provides perl(warnings) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228429 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- 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 Jun 12 15:09:40 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:09:40 -0400 Subject: [Bug 243832] perl & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706121509.l5CF9eCf019797@bugzilla.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 & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243832 ------- Additional Comments From cweyl at alumni.drew.edu 2007-06-12 11:09 EST ------- mod_perl-devel no longer provides perl(warnings) as of 2.0.3-9. (/me reminds himself to update before tinkering with closed bugs...) -- 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 Jun 13 20:04:29 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 16:04:29 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242249] bug reading from socket in perl5db.pl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706132004.l5DK4Tmm008447@bugzilla.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: bug reading from socket in perl5db.pl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242249 rnorwood at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO Flag| |needinfo?(ihok at hotmail.com) ------- Additional Comments From rnorwood at redhat.com 2007-06-13 16:04 EST ------- Hi Jack, I can apply the patch, but can you point me towards a way to reproduce the 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 buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Jun 15 22:08:38 2007 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:08:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Package EVR problems in Fedora 2007-06-15 Message-ID: <20070615220838.D0A9D152143@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> perl-Algorithm-C3 FE5 > F7 (0:0.07-1.fc5 > 0:0.06-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.07-1.fc6 > 0:0.06-1.fc7) perl-CGI-Ex FE5 > F7 (0:2.13-1.fc5 > 0:2.12-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:2.13-1.fc6 > 0:2.12-1.fc7) perl-Class-C3 FE5 > F7 (0:0.18-1.fc5 > 0:0.14-1.fc6) FE6 > F7 (0:0.18-1.fc6 > 0:0.14-1.fc6) perl-Class-C3-XS FE5 > F7 (0:0.06-1.fc5 > 0:0.04-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.06-1.fc6 > 0:0.04-1.fc7) perl-Class-Data-Accessor FE5 > F7 (0:0.04001-1.fc5 > 0:0.04000-3.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.04001-1.fc6 > 0:0.04000-3.fc7) perl-Class-MOP FE5 > F7 (0:0.38-1.fc5 > 0:0.37-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.38-1.fc6 > 0:0.37-1.fc7) perl-Data-Alias FE5 > F7 (0:1.05-1.fc5 > 0:1.04-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:1.05-1.fc6 > 0:1.04-1.fc7) perl-Event FE6 > F7 (0:1.09-1.fc6 > 0:1.08-1.fc7) perl-File-RsyncP FE6 > F7 (0:0.68-1.fc6 > 0:0.62-3.fc6) perl-Gtk2-Notify FE6 > F7 (0:0.03-1.fc6 > 0:0.02-4.fc7) perl-Gtk2-TrayIcon FE5 > F7 (0:0.06-1.fc5 > 0:0.03-3.fc6) FE6 > F7 (0:0.06-1.fc6 > 0:0.03-3.fc6) perl-JSON-XS FE5 > F7 (0:1.22-1.fc5 > 0:1.21-3.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:1.22-1.fc6 > 0:1.21-3.fc7) perl-Moose FE5 > F7 (0:0.22-1.fc5 > 0:0.21-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.22-1.fc6 > 0:0.21-1.fc7) perl-Params-Util FE5 > F7 (0:0.25-1.fc5 > 0:0.24-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.25-1.fc6 > 0:0.24-1.fc7) perl-POE-Component-Server-SOAP FE5 > F7 (0:1.11-1.fc5 > 0:1.10-1.fc6) FE6 > F7 (0:1.11-1.fc6 > 0:1.10-1.fc6) perl-POE-Component-SimpleDBI FE5 > F7 (0:1.16-1.fc5 > 0:1.15-1.fc6) FE6 > F7 (0:1.16-1.fc6 > 0:1.15-1.fc6) perl-POE-Component-SSLify FE5 > F7 (0:0.08-1.fc5 > 0:0.07-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.08-1.fc6 > 0:0.07-1.fc7) perl-Sub-Exporter FE5 > F7 (0:0.974-1.fc5 > 0:0.972-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.974-1.fc6 > 0:0.972-1.fc7) perl-SVN-Mirror FE5 > F7 (0:0.73-1.fc5 > 0:0.72-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.73-1.fc6 > 0:0.72-1.fc7) perl-Test-WWW-Mechanize FE6 > F7 (0:1.14-1.fc6 > 0:1.12-1.fc6) From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jun 16 06:32:52 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 02:32:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 216536] Review Request: FuzzyOcr - Checks for specific keywords in image attachments, using gocr In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706160632.l5G6WqMV013804@bugzilla.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: Review Request: FuzzyOcr - Checks for specific keywords in image attachments, using gocr https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216536 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2007-06-16 02:32 EST ------- Has there been any progress here? If Orion no longer wants to drive this submission, perhaps this ticket should be closed. If someone else wants to submit this package, they can open a separate ticket. -- 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 Jun 16 22:20:28 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 18:20:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242810] perl-Net-Server: repoclosure problem because perl-IO-Multiplex is not available In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706162220.l5GMKSal028550@bugzilla.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-Net-Server: repoclosure problem because perl-IO-Multiplex is not available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242810 ------- Additional Comments From bjohnson at symetrix.com 2007-06-16 18:20 EST ------- This appears to be a simple fix... either a) request perl-IO-Multiplex to be branched and built for epel4 or b) change requires on perl(IO::Multiplext) to: # build for epel5 using perl(IO::Multiplex) %{?el5: Requires: perl(IO::Multiplex)} I don't see the point in allowing the repository to be broken for long periods of time - especially for epel. -- 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 Jun 17 00:02:30 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 20:02:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242810] perl-Net-Server: repoclosure problem because perl-IO-Multiplex is not available In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706170002.l5H02Uca031328@bugzilla.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-Net-Server: repoclosure problem because perl-IO-Multiplex is not available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242810 nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net |kevin at tummy.com ------- Additional Comments From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net 2007-06-16 20:02 EST ------- Oops, I'm not supposed to handle Net-Server EPEL bugs, seems the default bugzilla owner is wrong Anyway: IO::Multiplex is in FE and F?7. It's an optional run-time dep. Fedora Net::Server depends on IO::Multiplex because IO::Multiplex is available in the Fedora repo (see bug #174099). Indeed latest Fedora-Devel added IO::Multiplex as BR so corresponding tests are run at build time. EPEL can do the same of choose not to depend on IO::Multiplex. That's really up to the EPEL maintainer. I personally would not have bumped the EPEL Net::Server version over the version of the package in the Fedora release corresponding RHEL was derived from (or at least taken the Fedora Devel package as source instead of branching from an old package), so obviously our packaging styles differ. -- 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 Jun 18 15:44:57 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:44:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242810] perl-Net-Server: repoclosure problem because perl-IO-Multiplex is not available In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706181544.l5IFivQu001676@bugzilla.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-Net-Server: repoclosure problem because perl-IO-Multiplex is not available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242810 kevin at tummy.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2007-06-18 11:44 EST ------- So sorry about this everyone. ;( I should have been listed as the epel owner, not sure what happened there, but I will get it fixed up. I will get this cleaned up asap. -- 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 Jun 18 15:49:13 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:49:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 228429] mod_perl errantly provides perl(warnings) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706181549.l5IFnDuo002425@bugzilla.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 errantly provides perl(warnings) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228429 jorton at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |vnpenguin at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From jorton at redhat.com 2007-06-18 11:49 EST ------- *** Bug 243832 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 Mon Jun 18 15:49:10 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:49:10 -0400 Subject: [Bug 243832] perl & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706181549.l5IFnAla002377@bugzilla.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 & mod_perl-devel : buggy dependency ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243832 jorton at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE ------- Additional Comments From jorton at redhat.com 2007-06-18 11:49 EST ------- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 228429 *** -- 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 Jun 18 18:07:21 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:07:21 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242810] perl-Net-Server: repoclosure problem because perl-IO-Multiplex is not available In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706181807.l5II7LlI020653@bugzilla.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-Net-Server: repoclosure problem because perl-IO-Multiplex is not available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242810 kevin at tummy.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE Fixed In Version| |0.96-2 ------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2007-06-18 14:07 EST ------- ok. Owner should be set now. I have pushed new builds that hopefully fix this issue. Please let me know if you spot any further problems. Sorry again for the delay here. -- 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 Jun 18 18:58:36 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:58:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 240502] FC6 PKCS12 erroneously reporting "Private key and certificate do not match" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706181858.l5IIwaju028803@bugzilla.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: FC6 PKCS12 erroneously reporting "Private key and certificate do not match" https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240502 tmraz at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|openssl |perl-Crypt-SSLeay AssignedTo|tmraz at redhat.com |rnorwood at redhat.com QAContact|bbrock at redhat.com | CC| |tmraz at redhat.com, fedora- | |perl-devel-list at redhat.com BugsThisDependsOn| |217138 ------- Additional Comments From tmraz at redhat.com 2007-06-18 14:58 EST ------- The problem is caused by non-initialization of PKCS12 part of openssl library in latest perl-Crypt-SSLeay package in FC6. -- 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 Jun 18 19:03:13 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:03:13 -0400 Subject: [Bug 217138] Wrong library initialization causes errors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706181903.l5IJ3DUB029440@bugzilla.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: Wrong library initialization causes errors https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217138 tmraz at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Keywords| |Reopened Resolution|RAWHIDE | CC| |tmraz at redhat.com ------- Additional Comments From tmraz at redhat.com 2007-06-18 15:03 EST ------- The bugfix caused regression - bug 240502. I think that it is correct to call both OpenSSL_add_all_algorithms() (the SSLeay_add_all_algorithms() is just a #define referencing this) and SSL_library_init(). I don't know why calling both should cause the segfaults and actually I cannot reproduce the segfaults here when I recompile the perl-Crypt-SSLeay with the patch modified to call both functions. -- 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 Jun 18 19:03:14 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:03:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 240502] FC6 PKCS12 erroneously reporting "Private key and certificate do not match" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706181903.l5IJ3ELE029464@bugzilla.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: FC6 PKCS12 erroneously reporting "Private key and certificate do not match" https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240502 Bug 240502 depends on bug 217138, which changed state. Bug 217138 Summary: Wrong library initialization causes errors https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217138 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|RAWHIDE | Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED -- 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 rnorwood at redhat.com Tue Jun 19 17:59:07 2007 From: rnorwood at redhat.com (Robin Norwood) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 13:59:07 -0400 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel In-Reply-To: (Robin Norwood's message of "Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:01:26 -0400") References: Message-ID: Robin Norwood writes: > Hi, > > This patch will remove the Requires that were placed on perl-devel at > the end of the f7 cycle. It is proposed for the 'devel' branch (f8). > Comments? > > (Ok, actually the patch is already applied, but I haven't built anything > yet.) Sorry for the delay, but here's an update: I'm asking Warren Togami to add the 'split out' perl modules to comps.xml so that these modules are installed by default whenver perl is. This (I hope, let me know if I'm wrong) addressess Jose's concern that the modules will be missing in most fedora installs and be very annoying to users, but still allows them to be removed easily if you don't want them. Does this work for everyone? -RN -- Robin Norwood Red Hat, Inc. "The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone." -Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jun 19 23:07:30 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 19:07:30 -0400 Subject: [Bug 196836] perl-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706192307.l5JN7U66028316@bugzilla.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-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196836 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Core |Fedora buribullet at gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |buribullet at gmail.com ------- Additional Comments From buribullet at gmail.com 2007-06-19 19:07 EST ------- perl-5.8.8-10 is 1000X slower! (It seems like O(2^n) slowdown where n is number of onmemory SV) Please rethink. It can kill real apps. (Or Fedora/RedHat is not for Perl?) # Here is simple benchmark, borrowed and modified from # http://blog.yappo.jp/yappo/archives/000515.html use Benchmark; timethese(shift || 100000, { 'overload' => sub { push our @array, TestOverload->new }, 'not overload' => sub { push our @array, TestNoverload->new }, }); package TestNoverload; sub new { bless { hoge => 'hoge' }, shift } package TestOverload; use overload ( q{""} => sub {}, ); sub new { bless { hoge => 'hoge' }, shift } -- 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 paul at city-fan.org Wed Jun 20 07:04:30 2007 From: paul at city-fan.org (Paul Howarth) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 08:04:30 +0100 Subject: Proposed patch to perl for f8 - remove Requires on perl-devel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1182323070.6131.0.camel@metropolis.intra.city-fan.org> On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 13:59 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote: > Robin Norwood writes: > > > Hi, > > > > This patch will remove the Requires that were placed on perl-devel at > > the end of the f7 cycle. It is proposed for the 'devel' branch (f8). > > Comments? > > > > (Ok, actually the patch is already applied, but I haven't built anything > > yet.) > > Sorry for the delay, but here's an update: > > I'm asking Warren Togami to add the 'split out' perl modules to > comps.xml so that these modules are installed by default whenver perl > is. This (I hope, let me know if I'm wrong) addressess Jose's concern > that the modules will be missing in most fedora installs and be very > annoying to users, but still allows them to be removed easily if you > don't want them. Does this work for everyone? Sounds good to me. Paul. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jun 20 17:07:52 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:07:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 196836] perl-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706201707.l5KH7qq4026964@bugzilla.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-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196836 ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2007-06-20 13:07 EST ------- FWIW, I just verified that perl-5.8.8-18.fc7 still has this problem, but a fresh compile of 5.9.4 doesn't. -- 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 Jun 20 19:12:46 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 15:12:46 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242065] perl-CGI-Session is not available in FE6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706201912.l5KJCkJQ031606@bugzilla.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-CGI-Session is not available in FE6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242065 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ocjtech.us 2007-06-20 15:12 EST ------- Ping... Is there a reason that perl-CGI-Session is not built for FC -6? It was branched for FC-6, and the package builds fine locally in mock... -- 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 Jun 21 07:26:24 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 03:26:24 -0400 Subject: [Bug 196836] perl-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706210726.l5L7QO45010728@bugzilla.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-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196836 ------- Additional Comments From buribullet at gmail.com 2007-06-21 03:26 EST ------- It was not O(2^n) but O(n^2), sorry. See following plot(n=10000 .. 100000) http://buribullet.net/svntrac/buribullet/attach_get/2/fedora-perl-overload.png Of course this should be O(n). O(n^2) for this case is not acceptable overhead. -- 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 Jun 21 19:18:09 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:18:09 -0400 Subject: [Bug 245225] New: perl-GD build warning perl-GD-2.35-2.fc6.src.rpm Message-ID: 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=245225 Summary: perl-GD build warning perl-GD-2.35-2.fc6.src.rpm Product: Fedora Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: low Component: perl-GD AssignedTo: jpo at di.uminho.pt ReportedBy: herrold at owlriver.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com Description of problem: perl-GD emits header related warnings during its build -- eitehr its expectation, of that of gd-devel as to header placement are wrong, and the warning should be addressed Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): perl-GD-2.35-2.fc6.src.rpm $ rpm -qf /usr/include/gd.h gd-devel-2.0.33-9.3.fc6 How reproducible: rpmbuild --rebuild perl-GD-2.35-2.fc6.src.rpm 2>&1 | grep Warning Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: (from my error and warning checker) Error: perl cruft found -|1|- ** WARNING: found gd.h header file in /usr/include/gd.h, but it is expected at /usr/include/gd.h. This may cause compile errors! ** Expected results: no warning to stderr, and no error as well [ a > /dev/null is inappropriate ;) ] 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 Fri Jun 22 00:13:16 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 20:13:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 245225] perl-GD build warning perl-GD-2.35-2.fc6.src.rpm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706220013.l5M0DGiq004575@bugzilla.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-GD build warning perl-GD-2.35-2.fc6.src.rpm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245225 jpo at di.uminho.pt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From jpo at di.uminho.pt 2007-06-21 20:13 EST ------- This patch eliminates the warning (but using File::Spec should provide a better solution): diff -ruN GD-2.35-orig/Makefile.PL GD-2.35/Makefile.PL --- GD-2.35-orig/Makefile.PL????2006-08-17 23:10:31.000000000 +0100 +++ GD-2.35/Makefile.PL?2007-06-22 01:07:14.000000000 +0100 @@ -295,6 +295,11 @@ my $problems; foreach (keys %libraries) { s/\blib\b/include/; + # + # The previous statement changes "/usr/lib/" into "/usr/include/" and + # that fails to match the %official_libraries hash "/usr/include" key + # + s/\/$//; next if $official_libraries{$_}; ? next unless -e "${_}/gd.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 buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Jun 22 09:00:32 2007 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 05:00:32 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Package EVR problems in Fedora 2007-06-22 Message-ID: <20070622090032.45CED152140@buildsys.fedoraproject.org> perl-Algorithm-C3 FE5 > F7 (0:0.07-1.fc5 > 0:0.06-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.07-1.fc6 > 0:0.06-1.fc7) perl-CGI-Ex FE5 > F7 (0:2.13-1.fc5 > 0:2.12-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:2.13-1.fc6 > 0:2.12-1.fc7) perl-Class-C3 FE5 > F7 (0:0.18-1.fc5 > 0:0.14-1.fc6) FE6 > F7 (0:0.18-1.fc6 > 0:0.14-1.fc6) perl-Class-C3-XS FE5 > F7 (0:0.06-1.fc5 > 0:0.04-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.06-1.fc6 > 0:0.04-1.fc7) perl-Class-Data-Accessor FE5 > F7 (0:0.04001-1.fc5 > 0:0.04000-3.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.04001-1.fc6 > 0:0.04000-3.fc7) perl-Class-MOP FE5 > F7 (0:0.38-1.fc5 > 0:0.37-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.38-1.fc6 > 0:0.37-1.fc7) perl-Data-Alias FE5 > F7 (0:1.05-1.fc5 > 0:1.04-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:1.05-1.fc6 > 0:1.04-1.fc7) perl-Event FE6 > F7 (0:1.09-1.fc6 > 0:1.08-1.fc7) perl-Gtk2-Notify FE6 > F7 (0:0.03-1.fc6 > 0:0.02-4.fc7) perl-Gtk2-TrayIcon FE5 > F7 (0:0.06-1.fc5 > 0:0.03-3.fc6) FE6 > F7 (0:0.06-1.fc6 > 0:0.03-3.fc6) perl-JSON-XS FE5 > F7 (0:1.22-1.fc5 > 0:1.21-3.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:1.22-1.fc6 > 0:1.21-3.fc7) perl-Moose FE5 > F7 (0:0.22-1.fc5 > 0:0.21-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.22-1.fc6 > 0:0.21-1.fc7) perl-Mozilla-LDAP FE5 > FE6 (0:1.5.1-1.fc5 > 0:1.5-9.fc6) FE5 > F7 (0:1.5.1-1.fc5 > 0:1.5-9.fc7) perl-Params-Util FE5 > F7 (0:0.25-1.fc5 > 0:0.24-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.25-1.fc6 > 0:0.24-1.fc7) perl-POE-Component-Server-SOAP FE5 > F7 (0:1.11-1.fc5 > 0:1.10-1.fc6) FE6 > F7 (0:1.11-1.fc6 > 0:1.10-1.fc6) perl-POE-Component-SimpleDBI FE5 > F7 (0:1.16-1.fc5 > 0:1.15-1.fc6) FE6 > F7 (0:1.16-1.fc6 > 0:1.15-1.fc6) perl-POE-Component-SSLify FE5 > F7 (0:0.08-1.fc5 > 0:0.07-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.08-1.fc6 > 0:0.07-1.fc7) perl-Sub-Exporter FE5 > F7 (0:0.974-1.fc5 > 0:0.972-1.fc7) FE6 > F7 (0:0.974-1.fc6 > 0:0.972-1.fc7) From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jun 22 20:20:15 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 16:20:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 196836] perl-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706222020.l5MKKFvu008839@bugzilla.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-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196836 ------- Additional Comments From rnorwood at redhat.com 2007-06-22 16:20 EST ------- This is reported upstream here: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=43283 And, as it turns out, Nicholas Clark points out a patch which fixes this issue on my test system: Benchmark: timing 100000 iterations of not overload, overload... not overload: 1 wallclock secs ( 0.48 usr + 0.24 sys = 0.72 CPU) @ 138888.89/s (n=100000) overload: 2 wallclock secs ( 0.50 usr + 0.22 sys = 0.72 CPU) @ 138888.89/s (n=100000) Building a fixed version for rawhide/f8 - updates for F7 and FC6 should be available soon. -- 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 Jun 23 00:56:00 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 20:56:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 237252] minor error in amavis-clamd.conf In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706230056.l5N0u0q0028120@bugzilla.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: minor error in amavis-clamd.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237252 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora steve at silug.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2007-06-22 20:55 EST ------- 2.5.1-1.fc7 should be showing up in updates-testing soon. Could you give it a try for me? -- 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 Jun 23 01:27:36 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:27:36 -0400 Subject: [Bug 237252] minor error in amavis-clamd.conf In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706230127.l5N1Raag029027@bugzilla.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: minor error in amavis-clamd.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237252 ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2007-06-22 21:27 EST ------- 2.5.2-0.1.rc2 will be in rawhide soon also. -- 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 Jun 23 04:00:00 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 00:00:00 -0400 Subject: [Bug 196836] perl-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706230400.l5N400OU004832@bugzilla.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-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196836 ------- Additional Comments From buribullet at gmail.com 2007-06-22 23:59 EST ------- Thank you for your quick action! It will save both community of Perl and Fedora/RedHat. -- 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 Jun 23 15:49:28 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 11:49:28 -0400 Subject: [Bug 196836] perl-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706231549.l5NFnSlW006998@bugzilla.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-5.8.8-5 is 30X slower than perl-5.8.8-4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196836 ------- Additional Comments From rnorwood at redhat.com 2007-06-23 11:49 EST ------- Update - I'm having a little trouble building the new perl - I'm still working on it, 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 Jun 25 16:15:22 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:15:22 -0400 Subject: [Bug 245592] New: Errno architecture i386-linux-thread-multi Message-ID: 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=245592 Summary: Errno architecture i386-linux-thread-multi Product: Fedora Version: f7 Platform: i386 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: low Component: perl-CPANPLUS AssignedTo: steve at silug.org ReportedBy: jcwinnie at gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-perl-devel- list at redhat.com,rnorwood at redhat.com,wtogami at redhat.com Description of problem: CPAN and CPANPLUS fail. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.cpan 2. 3. Actual results: cpan shell -- CPAN exploration and modules installation (v1.7602) ReadLine support enabled cpan> r CPAN: Storable loaded ok Going to read /root/.cpan/Metadata Database was generated on Thu, 31 May 2007 19:08:59 GMT CPAN: LWP::UserAgent loaded ok Fetching with LWP: ftp://ftp.perl.org/pub/CPAN/authors/01mailrc.txt.gz LWP failed with code[500] message[Errno architecture (i386-linux-thread-multi-2.6.9- 42.0.8.elsmp) does not match executable architecture (i386-linux-thread-multi-2.6.19- 1.2895.fc6xen) at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/Errno.pm line 11. Compilation failed in require at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/IO/ Socket.pm line 17. BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/IO/ Socket.pm line 17. Compilation failed in require at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Net/FTP.pm line 18. BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Net/FTP.pm line 18. Compilation failed in require at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/LWP/Protocol/ftp.pm line 24. ] Fetching with Net::FTP: ftp://ftp.perl.org/pub/CPAN/authors/01mailrc.txt.gz Can't locate object method "new" via package "Net::FTP" at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/ CPAN.pm line 2250. Expected results: To be capable of running checkgmail Additional info: Have tried removing perl-devel to no avail. -- 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 Jun 25 18:21:37 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:21:37 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242249] bug reading from socket in perl5db.pl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706251821.l5PILbSR004068@bugzilla.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: bug reading from socket in perl5db.pl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242249 bugzilla at redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Product|Fedora Core |Fedora ihok at hotmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ON_DEV Flag|needinfo?(ihok at hotmail.com) | ------- Additional Comments From ihok at hotmail.com 2007-06-25 14:21 EST ------- I came across this issue in the process of troubleshooting a bug in E-P-I-C, which is an Eclipse plug-in for editing Perl. http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1729216&group_id=75859&atid=545274 I think that the fix I request will alleviate some (but not all) causes of that 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 Mon Jun 25 18:41:23 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:41:23 -0400 Subject: [Bug 245592] Errno architecture i386-linux-thread-multi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706251841.l5PIfNYi006467@bugzilla.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: Errno architecture i386-linux-thread-multi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245592 steve at silug.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|perl-CPANPLUS |perl AssignedTo|steve at silug.org |rnorwood at redhat.com CC| |tcallawa at redhat.com, | |steve at silug.org, | |rc040203 at freenet.de ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2007-06-25 14:41 EST ------- CPANPLUS isn't involved here, so I'm reassigning this to the proper component. Most likely the problem is that you have been using the CPAN shell. Removing modules you installed by hand (instead of from rpm packages) will probably fix the issue. (Note the /site_perl/ in your error message. That shouldn't be from Fedora-supplied packages.) In the future, if you want a module (say, "Foo::Bar"), try yum first ("yum install 'perl(Foo::Bar)'"). -- 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 Jun 26 06:15:18 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 02:15:18 -0400 Subject: [Bug 245699] New: perl-DBD-Sqlite: version 1.13 is available Message-ID: 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=245699 Summary: perl-DBD-Sqlite: version 1.13 is available Product: Fedora Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: low Component: perl-DBD-SQLite AssignedTo: jpo at di.uminho.pt ReportedBy: ruben at rubenkerkhof.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-perl-devel-list at redhat.com Description of problem: version 1.13 of DBD::SQLite is available. Would you please consider upgrading it? It's a dependency for a new package of mine. Thanks, Ruben -- 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 Jun 26 17:21:01 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:21:01 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242065] perl-CGI-Session is not available in FE6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706261721.l5QHL1r0030067@bugzilla.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-CGI-Session is not available in FE6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242065 ------- Additional Comments From jeff at ocjtech.us 2007-06-26 13:20 EST ------- Ping again... -- 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 Jun 26 18:21:33 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:21:33 -0400 Subject: [Bug 242065] perl-CGI-Session is not available in FE6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706261821.l5QILXmB005220@bugzilla.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-CGI-Session is not available in FE6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242065 andreas at bawue.net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE ------- Additional Comments From andreas at bawue.net 2007-06-26 14:21 EST ------- Sorry for the delay, the notebook with the build-tools was broken. Package has been built for FC6. Thanks again for the patience, closing 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 Jun 27 03:49:55 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 23:49:55 -0400 Subject: [Bug 237252] minor error in amavis-clamd.conf In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706270349.l5R3ntTE024835@bugzilla.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: minor error in amavis-clamd.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237252 ------- Additional Comments From updates at fedoraproject.org 2007-06-26 23:49 EST ------- amavisd-new-2.5.1-1.fc7 has been pushed to the Fedora 7 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 rnorwood at redhat.com Thu Jun 28 15:43:20 2007 From: rnorwood at redhat.com (Robin Norwood) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 11:43:20 -0400 Subject: Anyone use perl-Net-DNS? Message-ID: Hi, I updated perl-Net-DNS to .60 for FC5-F8. It's in updates-testing for FC5-F7 now. Since the window for FC5 updates is closing fast, if anyone on the list happens to use Net::DNS on FC5, please give it a look and let me know if it works, or not. Testing for FC6 and F7 is also appreciated, of course. There are some security fixes included, which is why I'm even bothering to roll an FC5 update this late in its lifecycle. http://search.cpan.org/src/OLAF/Net-DNS-0.60/Changes Thanks, -RN -- Robin Norwood Red Hat, Inc. "The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone." -Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jun 28 20:07:47 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:07:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 237252] minor error in amavis-clamd.conf In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706282007.l5SK7lgk031076@bugzilla.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: minor error in amavis-clamd.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237252 ------- Additional Comments From nicku at nicku.org 2007-06-28 16:07 EST ------- It appears to work so far. The other issue with clamav-data-0.90.2-1 probably deserves a bug report of its own. -- 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 Jun 28 20:13:52 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:13:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 237252] minor error in amavis-clamd.conf In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706282013.l5SKDqVY031981@bugzilla.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: minor error in amavis-clamd.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237252 ------- Additional Comments From steve at silug.org 2007-06-28 16:13 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6) > The other issue with clamav-data-0.90.2-1 probably > deserves a bug report of its own. I could be wrong, but that would probably get closed with NOTABUG. I think you need to run freshclam manually once to get clamd or clamscan to work properly. Again, I could be totally wrong about that 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 Thu Jun 28 20:37:54 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:37:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 237252] minor error in amavis-clamd.conf In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706282037.l5SKbsYn002393@bugzilla.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: minor error in amavis-clamd.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237252 ------- Additional Comments From nicku at nicku.org 2007-06-28 16:37 EST ------- clamd should run without freshclam having to be run first. See bug 246151. -- 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 Jun 29 14:03:16 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 10:03:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 237252] minor error in amavis-clamd.conf In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706291403.l5TE3GYc009412@bugzilla.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: minor error in amavis-clamd.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237252 ------- Additional Comments From updates at fedoraproject.org 2007-06-29 10:03 EST ------- amavisd-new-2.5.1-1.fc7 has been pushed to the Fedora 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Jun 29 14:03:19 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 10:03:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 237252] minor error in amavis-clamd.conf In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706291403.l5TE3JwE009445@bugzilla.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: minor error in amavis-clamd.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237252 updates at fedoraproject.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |ERRATA Fixed In Version| |2.5.1-1.fc7 -- 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 Jun 29 14:53:15 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 10:53:15 -0400 Subject: [Bug 237252] minor error in amavis-clamd.conf In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706291453.l5TErFKK014381@bugzilla.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: minor error in amavis-clamd.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237252 ------- Additional Comments From nicku at nicku.org 2007-06-29 10:53 EST ------- (In reply to comment #9) > amavisd-new-2.5.1-1.fc7 has been pushed to the Fedora 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. Sorry, I should have made it clearer: when I said "it seems to work so far", I meant amavisd-new-2.5.1-1.fc7. -- 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 steve at silug.org Fri Jun 29 19:12:44 2007 From: steve at silug.org (Steven Pritchard) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 14:12:44 -0500 Subject: cpanspec update Message-ID: <20070629191244.GA27938@osiris.silug.org> Since perl-IO-Compress-Bzip2 is in the development tree now, I've pushed cpanspec 1.71 out. (It picked up a new dependency in order to handle .bz2 files.) I'd like to make the next version properly handle the new split perl package. Right now, there's some code that filters out any dependencies found in Module::CoreList. I added a quick hack to automatically add perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) to the BuildRequires unless the package uses Module::Build, but that doesn't help with tests that require Test::More, etc. So I'm curious what you all think would be the best solution here... 1) Just remove the Module::CoreList check entirely, and potentially end up with lots of (likely redundant) core perl dependencies. 2) Keep the Module::CoreList check, but also keep a whitelist of dependencies we should keep. 3) Use the output of "rpm -q --provides perl" on the system running cpanspec instead of the Module::CoreList check. 4) Do 3, but add an option to get the old behavior. (There's already a rather overloaded option "--old" that will turn off the check entirely.) I'm inclined to go with 4. Steve -- Steven Pritchard - K&S Pritchard Enterprises, Inc. Email: steve at kspei.com http://www.kspei.com/ Phone: (618)398-3000 Mobile: (618)567-7320 From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jun 30 17:45:16 2007 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 13:45:16 -0400 Subject: [Bug 245592] Errno architecture i386-linux-thread-multi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200706301745.l5UHjG8Q017446@bugzilla.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: Errno architecture i386-linux-thread-multi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245592 ------- Additional Comments From jcwinnie at gmail.com 2007-06-30 13:45 EST ------- Yes. Same problem occurred on another machine. CPAN and CPANPLUS worked. After running CPAN and following the suggestion to upgrade CPAN, that system also was borked, another the problem was slightly different. So , not being a perl guru, one should avoid using CPAN then. Or, at least avoid install Bundle::CPAN from the CLI, although it is unclear why then CPAN is made available the distribution. -- 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.