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

Re: Proposed mass bug filing: /usr/lib/perl5 is changing with Perl 5.20

(sorry about the delay)

On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 01:38:43PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> writes:
> > On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 11:39:34AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> Build-Depends on perl (>= 5.20) would make the transition smooth for
> >> users and the buildds.  The only drawback I can think of is that you'd
> >> have to revert that and the path change when backporting.
> > I'm not sure that a Build-Depends is needed.  I think we want to
> > avoid that if it's not needed.
> It depends on how much you care about making it easy to backport.  I agree
> that it complicates matters for backports, since that change would have to
> be reverted for backports.  But, apart from that issue, I don't see the
> drawback.  These packages Build-Depend on perl anyway, and versioning that
> dependency ensures the new directory structure is available and allows for
> very simple package build rules.

All of the affected packages need to be rebuilt when Perl 5.20 enters
sid. If we need source uploads for that (which seems to be what you're
proposing), the transition will become longer and harder to manage. Such
packages will also make our test rebuilds more difficult.

So for my part I'd very much prefer binNMUable packages that work with
both the old and the new $Config{vendorarch} layout.  The executable
debhelper install files seem like a neat solution for Bastien's problem.

Now that perl/5.20.0-1 is in experimental, I plan to do one more test
rebuild and then file the bugs as proposed, probably in the same vein
as #750128 (thanks, dam!)
Niko Tyni   ntyni@debian.org

Reply to: