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

Re: [Bug 230608] missing config.h in latest -14

On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 11:08 -0500, Robin Norwood wrote:
> Paul Howarth <paul city-fan org> writes:
> > Warren Togami wrote:
> >> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >>>
> >>> As this thing doesn't seem to be baked yet[1], and as I don't want to
> >>> see FE-6 and FE-5 being locked out from updates, for now, I will ignore
> >>> this issue on rawhide, i.e. you will likely see broken EVRs between
> >>> rawhide and older FE, on my perl-modules, soon.
> >> Why broken EVR's?
> >
> > Most perl module packages can use a common spec file across all
> > branches, except this is now broken in devel since perl-devel is
> > needed to build even noarch perl-based packages. So Ralf isn't
> > updating perl modules in devel until this is resolved, with the result
> > that updated packages in branches for older releases have higher EVRs
> > than the equivalent packages in devel. I'm doing likewise for the
> > moment.
> If we retroactively add a 'Provides: perl-devel' to versions of perl in
> older distributions, will that help?
It will solve the *.spec portability issue, but ... the core question
still remains: Is this split "correct" and "sustainable" or simply

ATM, IMO, the outcome is still unclear.

E.g. wrt to the MakeMaker issue, the "correct solution" would be to let
a ExtUtils::MakeMaker spec "Requires: perl-devel", and to let all
perl-modules using ExtUtils::MakeMaker at build-time
"BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)".

I had wanted to have deeper look into this problem throughout today, but
haven't found the time for it (and my day is almost over).


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