Dan,
Then you might take a stab at debugging the testcase from the bugzilla
report...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69254
...since it sounds similar. If it isn't then we have another bug to fix.
Jack
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 11:48:21PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Adam,
>Well it will be one thing if the debian perl maintainers
> are going to actively track down and fix these critical perl
> bugs on their own. However if we are going to passively wait
> for fixes from upstream, perhaps perl 5
Adam,
Well it will be one thing if the debian perl maintainers
are going to actively track down and fix these critical perl
bugs on their own. However if we are going to passively wait
for fixes from upstream, perhaps perl 5.80 will introduce
a bit too much breakage for right now. I mean dpkg IS
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Hello,
> Considering how unstable perl 5.80 currently is, wouldn't it be
> wise to regress sid back to perl 5.60 and move 5.80 into experimental
> instead? So far this upgrade has done major damage to dpkg by breaking
> install-info making any additio
4 matches
Mail list logo
