[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Switch to perl-5.005_02 ?

Le Mon, Oct 05, 1998 at 01:57:46AM -0400, Adam P. Harris écrivait:
> C'mon, let's be realistic.  Introducing a new perl right now would
> basically blow a 1998 stable slink out of the picture (as would PAM,
> of course), IMHO.  It's not just a question of re-uploading 35
> packages, but also of testing, and tracking down interactions.  Maybe
> I'm too pessimistic, but it seems like a big problem to me.

Yes, You're too pessimistic :), what problems of testing and interactions do
you mean ? As far as I know, recompiled modules work out of the box.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I dont think.

> It would be much preferable to wait until post-freeze, and then,
> w.r.t. the libraries, either have perl conflict with the older
> versions of things, or else provide a big perl5.05 "profile package"
> or some such external mechanism to ensure the smoothness of the
> transition.

Yes, if we do nothing for slink then we will have to make perl5.005 (and
all perl package after 5.005) conflict with a list of 35 package with
precise version. It seems to me ungraceful... the other solution
would be to add a conflict line for actual lib*-perl packages but then
they need to be modified and uploaded, so why not just upgrading ?

> If it's a big issue, why can't we plan on having a Debian 2.2 release
> very quickly, i.e., freeze again in January or Feb?  Our main goal is

Why should it be a big issue ? It's just a matter of saying "ok from now we
will use perl5.005" so  lib*-perl package will depend on it and we have
to recompile them. It's not like PAM where interactions with other packages
are important.

> an integrated, stable system.  We shouldn't give into fetish for the
> newest versions, at the expense of stability.

Perl 5.005 is stable. 

Hertzog Raphaël ¤ 0C4CABF1 ¤ http://www.mygale.org/~hra/

Reply to: