Re: Pre-approval for the hopefully final lenny perl version
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 08:00:31PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 03:22:22PM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > +Conflicts: autoconf2.13 (<< 2.13-45), libscalar-list-utils-perl (<< 1:1.18-1), libxsloader-perl (<< 0.08-1),
> > + libcflow-perl (<< 1:0.68-11.1),
> > + libqt-perl (<< 3.008-3),
> > + libclass-methodmaker-perl (<< 2.10-1),
> > + libclearsilver-perl (<< 0.10.4-1.1),
> > + libhamlib2-perl (<< 1.2.6.2-6),
> > + libsys-cpu-perl (<< 0.40-2.1),
> > + megahal (<< 9.1.1a-5),
> > + razor (<< 1:2.84-6)
>
> How was this list composed? It seems to miss e.g. icheck << 0.9.7-6.1
> (I NMUed that one, that's why I noticed).
Thanks for noting this! It was from my lintian bug submission (#463142),
but http://lists.debian.org/debian-perl/2008/01/msg00267.html listed
quite a few more that were fixed already by then, and icheck and
findimagedupes were only found afterwards because their XS modules aren't
in /usr/lib/perl5.
I went through my bug submissions and all Etch/main packages having
usr/lib/perl5/.*\.so without a perlapi or libperl5.8 dependency.
Here's an updated list of the conflicts:
libcflow-perl (<< 1:0.68-11.1),
libqt-perl (<< 3.008-3),
libclass-methodmaker-perl (<< 2.10-1),
libclearsilver-perl (<< 0.10.4-1.1),
libhamlib2-perl (<< 1.2.6.2-6),
libsys-cpu-perl (<< 0.40-2.1),
libterm-size-perl (<< 0.2-4),
libsufary-perl (<< 2.1.1-8),
libcrypt-openssl-rsa-perl (<< 0.25-1),
libcrypt-openssl-dsa-perl (<< 0.13-3),
libcrypt-openssl-random-perl (<< 0.04-1),
libcrypt-openssl-bignum-perl (<< 0.04-1),
libvideo-ivtv-perl (<< 0.13-6),
icheck (<< 0.9.7-6.1),
findimagedupes (<< 2.11-2),
megahal (<< 9.1.1a-5),
razor (<< 1:2.84-6)
That makes 17 already. This is getting uglier and uglier; can somebody
think of a better way to do this?
The libprelude2 and libpreludedb0 packages are somewhat special: the Perl
modules have been split into libprelude-perl and libpreludedb-perl after
Etch, and I can't see an upgrade path that would keep the Perl bindings
installed, so they clearly aren't considered particularly important by
the maintainer. So I think we could leave these out:
libprelude2 (<< 0.9.12-1),
libpreludedb0 (<< 0.9.11.2-1),
as well as the still unfixed swish-e...
--
Niko Tyni ntyni@debian.org
Reply to: