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

Re: Bug#465783: perl: ExtUtils::Install upgrade in Perl 5.10 breaks too many packages



On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 01:09:09AM +1100, Brendan O'Dea wrote:

> >On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Niko Tyni wrote:
> >> I run a few greps on debian/rules of the source packages of all the
> >> binary packages matching '-perl' in unstable. Results: at least 398
> >> arch:all and 38 arch:any packages apparently do an unconditional rmdir
> >> for the empty directory.

Update: three weeks after my mass bug filing 70% of the 'arch:all rmdir
failed' (aka. perl-5.10-ftbfs-rmdir on [1]) bugs have been fixed. There
are still 119 of them left, though. Kudos particularly to Gregor and
the other hard-working pkg-perl folks for the almost endless stream of
closed bugs :)

Additionally, there are 13 arch:all packages that fail to build for other
reasons ('perl-5.10-ftbfs' on [1]), mainly due to test suite failures.
Two of them are still using pseudo hashes..

> I'm keen to get 5.10 into Lenny, since the length of our stable release
> cycles otherwise means that we'll be stuck with 5.8 for quite a while.
> 
> My initial thought was to set up a staging area, although was told that
> with the binNMU mechanism it should no longer be necessary...  This
> issue with rmdir however would appear to have torpedoed that plan.

Out of the 310 arch:any packages that need to be binNMU'd, 36 currently
fail to build with Perl 5.10 (most of 'perl-5.10-transition' on [1]).
These take 8 more with them because their build dependencies include
libxml-parser-perl (#458144) or libpadwalker-perl (#463546) from the
first set.

21 of the 36 failures are due to the 'rmdir issue'.

Note that this doesn't take into account 'regular' FTBFS issues on
current sid, I haven't usertagged those.

Anyway, it looks like the binNMU plan is still good, and a patch/NMU
campaign of the relatively few 'perl-5.10-transition' bugs on [1] would
make it even better. Any takers?

> Given the mechanical nature of the fix required, I am still inclined to
> uploading to unstable before the soft freeze in a week or so.  Remember,
> it's called "unstable" for a reason, people.

It's been more than three weeks now. Any news on the schedule?

[1] usertag overview linked from the end of 
    http://wiki.debian.org/Perl5.10Transition

Cheers,
-- 
Niko Tyni   ntyni@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: