[Bug 165885] Misnamed package, add Provides?
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Misnamed package, add Provides?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165885
------- Additional Comments From rc040203(a)freenet.de 2005-08-18 23:03 EST -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> Sure, it wasn't entirely unexpected, otherwise I would have noticed it in my
> Anyway, as said, IMO it's Ralf's call whether he wants to do something about
> this package, and my .02€ is listed in the summary and initial comment of this
> bug...
... and I had asked for opinions in comment #3 ;)
Tell me how you want me to proceed with it.
To me, the current naming of this package is fine, but I also don't have a
problem in changing it, if there is common agreement on this matter.
Technically, adding a "provides: perl-gettext" is matter of minutes, but
renaming the package would require more "brains".
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
18 years, 8 months
[Bug 165907] perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165907
------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta(a)iki.fi 2005-08-18 14:12 EST -------
This is getting off topic in this particular Bugzilla report, but I've earlier
suggested prefixing all of site_perl (modules, man pages, bin etc)
to /usr/local so it could be easily used for local core/vendor Perl overrides,
packaged or not. As expected, some people liked the suggestion, some didn't
-> nothing hasn't happened, at least yet...
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
18 years, 8 months
[Bug 165885] Misnamed package, add Provides?
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Misnamed package, add Provides?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165885
------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta(a)iki.fi 2005-08-18 14:05 EST -------
Sure, it wasn't entirely unexpected, otherwise I would have noticed it in my
review :)
But I still think using the CPAN distribution name is the right thing to do,
at least wrt the guidelines. Why settle for "usually they have a main
module", and spend time pondering what might The Module be (checking
VERSION_FROM is not necessarily a very good criteria for that), when all of
them have an unambiguous distribution name as long as the unit of packaging is
the very distribution?
Anyway, as said, IMO it's Ralf's call whether he wants to do something about
this package, and my .02€ is listed in the summary and initial comment of this
bug...
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
18 years, 8 months
[Bug 165907] perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165907
------- Additional Comments From altblue(a)n0i.net 2005-08-18 13:55 EST -------
Paul, let's keep it all in one place ;-)
> Is there an "approved" way of packaging later versions of specific
> modules that are bundled with the perl rpm? This is sometimes needed to
> satisfy dependencies, particularly for legacy distros.
If there is one, I haven't heard about it. All I know is there were some
discussions on this issue on the various RedHat/Fedora mailing lists, but AFAIR
there was no (positive) conclusion.
So, for what it worths, what I do now is something like: build packages for
those updated module replacing the usual %{_mandir} (/usr/share/man) with
/usr/local/share/man, replacing %{_bindir} (/usr/bin) with /usr/local/bin, and
using vendor install for the modules.
It's nasty/ugly/bad/etc ... but it's my (bad) way and "works for me".
OFC, this way I cannot either use the stock RH/FC perl package (those missing
versions in Obsoletes being an issue).
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
18 years, 8 months
[Bug 165907] perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165907
------- Additional Comments From altblue(a)n0i.net 2005-08-18 13:45 EST -------
On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 13:16 -0400, bugzilla(a)redhat.com wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From altblue(a)n0i.net 2005-08-18 13:16 EST -------
> > Second patch - core modules
> JPO, if you are at this, please add versions to all those Obsoletes packages,
> something like:
> Obsoletes: perl-Time-HiRes <= 1.65
>
> This way, in a future ideal world maybe we could be able to build our own
> perl-CGI, perl-CPAN, etc updated packages without having to cope with the
> "main" perl package.
Is there an "approved" way of packaging later versions of specific
modules that are bundled with the perl rpm? This is sometimes needed to
satisfy dependencies, particularly for legacy distros.
Paul.
--
Paul Howarth <paul(a)city-fan.org>
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
18 years, 8 months
[Bug 165885] Misnamed package, add Provides?
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Misnamed package, add Provides?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165885
------- Additional Comments From altblue(a)n0i.net 2005-08-18 13:38 EST -------
> IMO, that makes no sense because the unit of CPAN module packaging is a CPAN
> _distribution_, and the vast majority those distributions contain more than
> one module. What's "the CPAN module name" then?
Usually, each cpan distribution has a so called "main module", hence the
VERSION_FROM MakeMaker option.
So, IMHO, maybe Ralf's choice was not so bad after all, or at least I think he
has a point. ;-)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
18 years, 8 months
[Bug 165907] perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: perl: specfile cleanup and update to 5.8.7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165907
------- Additional Comments From altblue(a)n0i.net 2005-08-18 13:16 EST -------
> Second patch - core modules
JPO, if you are at this, please add versions to all those Obsoletes packages,
something like:
Obsoletes: perl-Time-HiRes <= 1.65
This way, in a future ideal world maybe we could be able to build our own
perl-CGI, perl-CPAN, etc updated packages without having to cope with the "main"
perl package.
--
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.
18 years, 8 months