Hi Bill
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 08:35:39AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
Hi Bill
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 08:25:31PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 08:31:51AM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
Hi Dominic
Only read trough yet (but not native english
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 09:02:53AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
Hi Bill
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 08:35:39AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
Hi Bill
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 08:25:31PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 08:31:51AM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 09:13:06PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
+ sect id=perl_upgrades
+headingPerl Package Upgrades/heading
+p
+ Starting from packageperl/package 5.12.3-2, a dpkg trigger
+ named varperl-major-upgrade/var will be triggered by the
On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 21:13:06 +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
From 87c527dce3a9f8dcaca7cf43f830ce9ff178f4e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dominic Hargreaves d...@earth.li
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:11:29 +
Subject: [PATCH] Describe the Perl upgrade trigger
---
perl-policy.sgml | 20
Hi Bill
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 08:25:31PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 08:31:51AM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
Hi Dominic
Only read trough yet (but not native english speaker):
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:35:16PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:35:31PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
On Sat, 28 May 2011 21:53:52 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
Is there progress on the implementation of this feature ?
It's in perl 5.12.3 since the upload to unstable:
On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 19:50:20 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
Is there progress on the implementation of this feature ?
It's in perl 5.12.3 since the upload to unstable:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2011/05/msg6.html
So are you seconding this policy amendment ?
If Niko
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 08:31:51AM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
Hi Dominic
Only read trough yet (but not native english speaker):
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:35:16PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
Signed-off-by: Dominic Hargreaves d...@earth.li
---
perl-policy.sgml | 20
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 07:50:20PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:35:31PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
On Sat, 28 May 2011 21:53:52 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
Is there progress on the implementation of this feature ?
It's in perl 5.12.3 since the upload to
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 09:13:06PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 07:50:20PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:35:31PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
On Sat, 28 May 2011 21:53:52 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
Is there progress on the
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 10:28:28PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 09:13:06PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 07:50:20PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:35:31PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
On Sat, 28 May 2011
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 09:53:52PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
Is there progress on the implementation of this feature ?
So far there are a single second and Niko partial objection.
For my part, I think this is important that the feature be documented (if
implemented)
but not
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 09:36:35AM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:31:24PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:38:19PM +0200, Niko Tyni wrote:
While I do think this is a nice solution, I've got a couple of concerns:
- is this overkill? Would
On Sat, 28 May 2011 21:53:52 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
Is there progress on the implementation of this feature ?
It's in perl 5.12.3 since the upload to unstable:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2011/05/msg6.html
Cheers,
gregor
--
.''`. Homepage:
Dominic Hargreaves d...@earth.li writes:
From: Dominic Hargreaves d...@earth.li
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:11:29 +
Subject: [PATCH] Describe the Perl upgrade trigger
Signed-off-by: Dominic Hargreaves d...@earth.li
---
perl-policy.sgml | 20
1 files changed, 20
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:31:24PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:38:19PM +0200, Niko Tyni wrote:
While I do think this is a nice solution, I've got a couple of concerns:
- is this overkill? Would it be enough for the long running daemons to just
register
Hi Dominic
Only read trough yet (but not native english speaker):
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:35:16PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
Signed-off-by: Dominic Hargreaves d...@earth.li
---
perl-policy.sgml | 20
1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 08:31:51AM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:35:16PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
@@ -461,6 +461,26 @@ perl -MExtUtils::Embed -e ldopts
package must depend upon it explicitly.
/p
/sect
+
+ sect
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:35:16PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
+
+ sect id=perl_upgrades
+headingPerl Package Upgrades/heading
+p
+ Starting from packageperl/package 5.12.3-2, a dpkg trigger
+ named varperl-major-upgrade/var will be triggered by
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:38:19PM +0200, Niko Tyni wrote:
While I do think this is a nice solution, I've got a couple of concerns:
- is this overkill? Would it be enough for the long running daemons to just
register an interest in a file trigger on /usr/bin/perl ? This means
minor perl
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.9.1.0
Dear Policy maintainers,
A not-so-recent bug report, #230308, raised the issue of how a long-running
program which would be broken (until restart) by a major Perl package upgrade
(eg from 5.10 to 5.12) could be notified of such a restart. There was a rough
Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
A not-so-recent bug report, #230308, raised the issue of how a long-running
program which would be broken (until restart) by a major Perl package upgrade
(eg from 5.10 to 5.12) could be notified of such a restart. There was a rough
consensus on that bug report that,
22 matches
Mail list logo
