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

Re: Please accept libembperl-perl NMU in Etch



On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 08:20:01PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Steve Langasek dijo [Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 07:08:49PM -0700]:
> > > I just NMUed libembperl-perl, after finding out it would kill some of
> > > my systems on upgrade from Sarge. The bug it fixes (#395870) was not
> > > marked as RC only as -I think- an oversight from the maintainer, and
> > > is quite trivial: I just rebuilt the package against the current
> > > Apache2/mod_perl2 packages (i.e. after the 2.0->2.2 transition).

> > Shouldn't this simply have been done as a binNMU?  Alternatively, should
> > ilbemperl-perl have a versioned dependency on apache2, instead of just a
> > recommends?

> Well, a rebuild should be carried out in every architecture - And it
> should be done against the current versions. And once updated, it will
> be incompatible with the previous versions (I'm unsure which is the
> one which complicts, if it is apache2 or libapache2-mod-perl2). I
> think it's cleaner to do a regular source NMU.

I disagree, given that there were no changes to the package's dependencies
that would enforce co-installation with a particular version of apache2.

> About Apache2: Well, it can work with Apache 1.3.x as well. It can
> even work offline (I use it offline in one app, now that I think of
> it). So, strictly, it depends on nothing but Perl. 

Indeed, so in that case I actually think this bug is not RC.

But I've now found that the package is failing to build on autobuilders, and
have filed bug #416016 about this.  If we can't get the package autobuilt,
then we certainly can't have it built for a particular apache2 in etch...

Thanks,
-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/



Reply to: