On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 09:39:42AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog 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. > > I tend to disagree. The number are big but the fix is easy. I'd suggest > to work with Lucas to do a full rebuild with perl 5.10 and submit those > 400 bugs right now with severity important. Also usertag them to be able > to follow the evolution. > > Then make an announce on d-d-a with a list of maintainers that have to > update their packages. Also inform that an NMU campaign may be done on > those bugs (even before they become RC). > > In fact, you can already post the dd-list you prepared together with > detailed explanations on the nature of the problem on d-d-a.
Done, although I settled for debian-devel (and debian-perl as a spam filter ate the X-Debbugs-Cc of this bug) at this point. Lucas, could you please help with the test rebuilds? A full archive rebuild with perl 5.10 from experimental is going to need some bootstrapping, as outlined in http://wiki.debian.org/Perl5.10Transition . In particular, the libxml-parser-perl dependency loop is going to require manual attention. I think it would make sense to get the uninstallable arch:any packages rebuilt first with the ExtUtils::Install change reverted to get around the 'empty rmdir' issue when bootstrapping. It would of course be also interesting to compare the list packages that FTBFS with and without the ExtUtils::Install change. Cheers, -- Niko Tyni [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
