Le Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 12:24:34AM -0800, Joey Hess écrivait:
> liblocale-gettext-perl
> libmldbm-perl
> dpkg-ftp
Those 3 are mine. I've just done it. No need to file a bug.
> perl-5.005-suid
This one should not be updated :)
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog -+- http://strasbourg.lin
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 03:26:07PM -, Moshe Zadka wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Dec 2000, Dariush Pietrzak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure that solves all the problems - I'd like apache-perl
> > recompiled against perl5.6, and so the rest of modules.
>
> I would do, but I'm not at all sur
Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> First we need to solve the IMHO broken Alternatives Settings of those Perl
> Packages. They messed up my System more than one.
See the BTS, there are patches (#80143). Someone should NMU it, it's absurd
it's been left so broken for so long.
> perl-5.6-base is removing
> a
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 03:26:07PM -, Moshe Zadka wrote:
> I would do, but I'm not at all sure if mod_perl works with Perl 5.6.
> Last I heard, they weren't playing well together.
Works for me with "slash". I only need to fix the Perl alternatives.
Greetings
Bernd
--
(OO) -- [EMAIL PR
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 04:12:19PM +0100, Dariush Pietrzak wrote:
> Or did I got completely confused and misunderstood the case?
First we need to solve the IMHO broken Alternatives Settings of those Perl
Packages. They messed up my System more than one. perl-5.6-base is removing
all the old perl a
Dariush Pietrzak wrote:
> It's no use if I got hmm say Apache::DBI module, but perl5.6 can't find it
> because it's in 5.005 tree, and DBD::Pg hidden in 5.005 tree, that cannot
> be used by 5.6 due to some binary incompatibilities.
Um, afaik perl 5.6 is fully binary compatable, and it certianly lo
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 04:43:13PM +0100, I wrote:
> I can verify that it works, we did a local recompile:
Maybe we did, but I can't read apt-cache output because this version
comes simply from unstable.
So no ifs and whens, it's already done and it works.
--
The idea is that the first face sho
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 03:26:07PM -, Moshe Zadka wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Dec 2000, Dariush Pietrzak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure that solves all the problems - I'd like apache-perl
> > recompiled against perl5.6, and so the rest of modules.
>
> I would do, but I'm not at all sur
On Tue, 26 Dec 2000, Dariush Pietrzak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure that solves all the problems - I'd like apache-perl
> recompiled against perl5.6, and so the rest of modules.
I would do, but I'm not at all sure if mod_perl works with Perl 5.6.
Last I heard, they weren't playing wel
> > all packages that depend on perl 5.00{5,4}[-base]. All such packages
> > should be updated to depend on perl-5.6 (possibly with 5.005 as an
> > alternate).
I'm not sure that solves all the problems - I'd like apache-perl
recompiled against perl5.6, and so the rest of modules.
It's no use if I
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 12:24:34AM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> I'm planning a mass automated -quiet bug reporting spree against almost
> all packages that depend on perl 5.00{5,4}[-base]. All such packages
> should be updated to depend on perl-5.6 (possibly with 5.005 as an
> alternate).
ITYM -main
I'm planning a mass automated -quiet bug reporting spree against almost
all packages that depend on perl 5.00{5,4}[-base]. All such packages
should be updated to depend on perl-5.6 (possibly with 5.005 as an
alternate).
84 packages[1] would get bug reports; most are perl module packages.
Comment
12 matches
Mail list logo
