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

Re: Intent for a perl NMU to fix the libmime-perl mess

Joe Buck writes:
> Matthias Klose writes:
> > I recently upgraded libmime-perl to a new version, which depends on a
> > newer MIME:Base64 version not included in the current perl package.
> > Cleaning up the mess I propose to do a perl NMU which updates the
> > MIME:Base64 package in perl from version 3.01 to 3.04.
> Since Perl is frozen (and such a vital package should be deep-frozen), what
> about the alternative of reverting to the older verions of libmime-perl
> and mailscanner?  Aren't there consequences for the installer if you change
> Perl now?  At least you should get the release managers' opinions.

every frozen package, which needs updating for sarge has consequences
for d-i. the current version of mailscanner isn't affected, but this
version doesn't correctly parse all messages, even messages which are
not spam, so you may consider this r-c. the 4.34 version of
mailscanner fixes these issues, but does require the newer perl
modules.  the change for perl is a local one for one extension module,
nothing else did change. an alternative could be to include the
modified perl packages to mailscanner and divert the perl files, but
this sounds more ugly.

posting to d-d was the reason to get the feedback, which I couldn't
get yet from the perl package maintainer.

> At this point, there should be laser-like focus on getting a release out,
> even if you can't include the latest and greatest versions of everything.
> The latest mime-tools release was urgency=low, so if that was set correctly
> it seems it doesn't have to go in pre-sarge.

the urgency was set to low to allow testing of the package. it doesn't
make sense to raise the urgency if you know, that you'll update
packages after this one package (upload libmime-perl now with
urgency=low, and mailscanner a few days later with urgency= medium
allows both packages to enter testing at the same time).


Reply to: