[suggest] broken dependencies for some perl modules on RHEL4
[Resent because it was rejected because I used a wrong sender address - apologies if this turns up twice] Several perl modules have broken dependencies on rhel4. For example: perl-DBD-Pg-2.17.1-1.el4.rf requires perl >= 5.006001 perl-Module-Build-0.3603-1.el4.rfrequires perl >= 5.006001 perl-Regexp-Common-2010010201-1.el4.rf requires perl >= 5.00473 However, RHEL4 uses a different numbering scheme: rpm -q --provides perl ... perl = 4:5.8.8-2.el4s1 and 4:5.8.8 apparently isn't greater than 5.006001, although it should be (5.8.8 is 5.008008 in the perl world, but of course RPM cannot know this). The culprit seems to be an explicit Requires line in the spec files which was added a few months ago. Given that 5.006001 is very old and 5.00473 is ancient and older versions were never installed on any RHEL still supported by rpmforge, these Requires lines could probably be safely omitted. I also noted that the SRPM for perl-DBD-Pg-2.17 (didn't look at the others) now has "el5" in the name. Maybe that was intended only for RHEL5 and built for the other versions by mistake? hp -- _ | Peter J. Holzer| Auf jedem Computer sollte der Satz Ludwigs II |_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | eingeprägt stehen: "Ein ewig Rätsel will ich | | | h...@wsr.ac.at | bleiben, mir und andern." __/ | http://www.hjp.at/ |-- Wolfram Heinrich in desd signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] Perl module update requests
Ok no we get some fun: ExtUtils::MakeMaker version 6.31 required--this is only version 6.30 at Makefile.PL line 7. BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at Makefile.PL line 7. Any opions on how to solve that in a decent way? Am Donnerstag, den 03.06.2010, 19:48 -0400 schrieb David Steinbrunner: > Hello all, > > A new version of DBIx::Class was released with dependencies on the latest > version of these modules: > > namespace::clean > SQL::Abstract > Class::Accessor::Grouped > > It would be appreciated if these could be updated in rpmforge. > > Thanks, > > -- > David Steinbrunner > > > ___ > suggest mailing list > suggest@lists.rpmforge.net > http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] broken dependencies for some perl modules on RHEL4
Thanks for reporting Peter. This happens as I replace autogernerated dependecies by rpmbuild through autogenerated dependencies from CPAN metadata. I will have a look at it. Chris Am Montag, den 07.06.2010, 09:56 +0200 schrieb Peter J. Holzer: > [Resent because it was rejected because I used a wrong sender address - > apologies if this turns up twice] > > Several perl modules have broken dependencies on rhel4. > > For example: > > perl-DBD-Pg-2.17.1-1.el4.rf requires perl >= 5.006001 > perl-Module-Build-0.3603-1.el4.rfrequires perl >= 5.006001 > perl-Regexp-Common-2010010201-1.el4.rf requires perl >= 5.00473 > > However, RHEL4 uses a different numbering scheme: > > rpm -q --provides perl > ... > perl = 4:5.8.8-2.el4s1 > > and 4:5.8.8 apparently isn't greater than 5.006001, although it should > be (5.8.8 is 5.008008 in the perl world, but of course RPM cannot know > this). > > The culprit seems to be an explicit Requires line in the spec files > which was added a few months ago. Given that 5.006001 is very old and > 5.00473 is ancient and older versions were never installed on any RHEL > still supported by rpmforge, these Requires lines could probably be > safely omitted. > > I also noted that the SRPM for perl-DBD-Pg-2.17 (didn't look at the > others) now has "el5" in the name. Maybe that was intended only for > RHEL5 and built for the other versions by mistake? > > hp > > ___ > suggest mailing list > suggest@lists.rpmforge.net > http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] broken dependencies for some perl modules on RHEL4
Am Montag, den 07.06.2010, 09:56 +0200 schrieb Peter J. Holzer: > [Resent because it was rejected because I used a wrong sender address - > apologies if this turns up twice] > > Several perl modules have broken dependencies on rhel4. > > For example: > > perl-DBD-Pg-2.17.1-1.el4.rf requires perl >= 5.006001 > perl-Module-Build-0.3603-1.el4.rfrequires perl >= 5.006001 > perl-Regexp-Common-2010010201-1.el4.rf requires perl >= 5.00473 > > However, RHEL4 uses a different numbering scheme: > > rpm -q --provides perl > ... > perl = 4:5.8.8-2.el4s1 > Actually it seems you are wrong yum provides "perl >= 5.006001" gives me this: perl.x86_64 3:5.8.5-49.el4 base Matched from: perl >= 5.006001 Also installing those modules went just fine for me. What exactly is the problem you are having? ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] broken dependencies for some perl modules on RHEL4
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Christoph Maser wrote: > yum provides "perl >= 5.006001" gives me this: > perl.x86_64 3:5.8.5-49.el4 3:5.8.5-49.el4 is greater than 5.006001 according to rpm, isn't it? The dependencies are broken because they do not really check Perl version: the module expects at least 5.6.1 but any 5.x for x>=1 would satisfy its dependency perl >= 5.006001. On the other hand, it is quite unlikely Perl packaged for a certain distro version would not be good enough for a module packaged for the same distro version. -- Pavel Kankovsky aka Peak / Jeremiah 9:21\ "For death is come up into our MS Windows(tm)..." \ 21st century edition / ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] Re: Latest XML::LibXSLT needed
Am Donnerstag, den 03.06.2010, 16:59 -0400 schrieb David Steinbrunner: > David Steinbrunner wrote: > > > The XML::LibXSLT and XML::LibXML packages in rpmforge are currently > > incompatible. See the following as evidence: > > > > [Mon May 03 19:19:18 2010] [error] This version of XML::LibXSLT requires > > XML::LibXML 1.6 (ABI 1), which is incompatible with currently installed > > XML::LibXML 1.70 (ABI 2). Please upgrade XML::LibXSLT, XML::LibXML, or both! > > at > > /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/XML/LibXML.pm > > line 49.\nBEGIN failed--compilation aborted at > > /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/XML/LibXSLT.pm > > line 7.\nCompilation failed in require at > > /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/Album/Apache/AuthCookie.pm line 32.\nBEGIN > > failed--compilation aborted at > > /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/Album/Apache/AuthCookie.pm line > > 32.\nCompilation failed in require at (eval 4) line 3.\n > > > > The version of XML::LibXSLT that is available is 1.62 while the buildlogs > > show > > that version 1.66 is the latest version that has tried to be built. > > > > Here is the error from the buildlog: > > > > error: Failed build dependencies: > > perl(XML::LibXML) >= 1.60 is needed by > > perl-XML-LibXSLT-1.66-1.el5.rf.x86_64 > > > > This is similar to the batch of issues I pointed out on the users list with > > the subject "Perl module build issues": > > > > http://lists.rpmforge.net/pipermail/users/2010-April/002963.html > > http://lists.rpmforge.net/pipermail/users/2010-April/002964.html > > > > I never saw a reply to those and it does not appear the issues have been > > resolved. > > > > In any case, it appears XML::LibXSLT version 1.70 is required to match the > > version of XML::LibXML that is available. Hopefully in the process of being > > built the newer XML::LibXML will be seen so the build will be successful. > > The buildlogs show no change here. > > I was recently talking to someone about rpmforge in general and they > mentioned this same exact issue so I'm not the only one that has run into > this, just the only one that has reported it. > > -- > David Steinbrunner I had another look at this. perl-XML-LibXML is shipped in base so we should not have it in the repo in the first place at least for RHEL5/C5. Since there is a incomptible change in the new perl-XML-LibXML overwriting the version from base is no option. As I am for a much more strict policy at rpmforge I vote for a complete removal of perl-XML-LibXMl and perl-XML-LibXSLT or at most provide an old version for perl-XML-LibXSLT wich works with the perl-XML-LibXML version from base. It is much better to not have a particular piece then to have a broken version. Chris ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] broken dependencies for some perl modules on RHEL4
On 2010-06-07 11:51:16 +0200, Christoph Maser wrote: > Am Montag, den 07.06.2010, 09:56 +0200 schrieb Peter J. Holzer: > > Several perl modules have broken dependencies on rhel4. > > > > For example: > > > > perl-DBD-Pg-2.17.1-1.el4.rf requires perl >= 5.006001 > > perl-Module-Build-0.3603-1.el4.rfrequires perl >= 5.006001 > > perl-Regexp-Common-2010010201-1.el4.rf requires perl >= 5.00473 > > > > However, RHEL4 uses a different numbering scheme: > > > > rpm -q --provides perl > > ... > > perl = 4:5.8.8-2.el4s1 > > > > Actually it seems you are wrong > > > yum provides "perl >= 5.006001" gives me this: I use up2date, not yum. Can yum access the Redhat repository on RHEL 4? I never checked, but that might be a good opportunity to switch from up2date to yum on the older redhat boxes. > perl.x86_64 3:5.8.5-49.el4 I have perl = 4:5.8.8-2.el4s1 (from the rhel-x86_64-as-4-webapp-1-beta channel), but that's an even higher version number, so if 3:5.8.5 is good enough, 4:5.8.8 should work, too. > Matched from: > perl >= 5.006001 No epoch, so a package with epoch 3 or even 4 should be larger in any case[1]. Indeed, if I download the package and install it with "rpm -U" it works fine. Looks like up2date ignores the epoch when comparing version numbers, which is definitely a bug (although I doubt that Redhat will fix it, since they switched to yum with RHEL 5). hp [1] Which makes the dependency a bit useless. -- _ | Peter J. Holzer| Auf jedem Computer sollte der Satz Ludwigs II |_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | eingeprägt stehen: "Ein ewig Rätsel will ich | | | h...@wsr.ac.at | bleiben, mir und andern." __/ | http://www.hjp.at/ |-- Wolfram Heinrich in desd signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] Re: Latest XML::LibXSLT needed
On Jun 7, 2010, at 11:31 AM, Christoph Maser wrote: > As I am for a much more strict policy at rpmforge I vote for a complete > removal of perl-XML-LibXMl and perl-XML-LibXSLT or at most provide an > old version for perl-XML-LibXSLT wich works with the perl-XML-LibXML > version from base. It is much better to not have a particular piece then > to have a broken version. Chris, i did some digging into this (see SVN r8817), and we need at the very minimum: perl-XML-LibXML <= 1.69 perl-XML-LibXML-Common (bring it back from the vault) perl-XML-LibXSLT <= 1.63 and we need Dag to remove any later versions from the repo. if we want to roll all the way back to the versions from upstream, we have to go back to perl-XML-LibXSLT <= 1.59 (there's already a spec for this in SVN). for packages that are as widely used as these, i'm OK with offering versions that replace packages from upstream, since their absence is really crippling. -shuff -- If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction. - Fabian, Twelfth Night, III,v http://five.sentenc.es PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] Re: Latest XML::LibXSLT needed
Am Montag, den 07.06.2010, 15:20 -0400 schrieb Steve Huff: > On Jun 7, 2010, at 11:31 AM, Christoph Maser wrote: > > > As I am for a much more strict policy at rpmforge I vote for a complete > > removal of perl-XML-LibXMl and perl-XML-LibXSLT or at most provide an > > old version for perl-XML-LibXSLT wich works with the perl-XML-LibXML > > version from base. It is much better to not have a particular piece then > > to have a broken version. > > > Chris, > > i did some digging into this (see SVN r8817), and we need at the very minimum: > > perl-XML-LibXML <= 1.69 > perl-XML-LibXML-Common (bring it back from the vault) > perl-XML-LibXSLT <= 1.63 > > and we need Dag to remove any later versions from the repo. > > if we want to roll all the way back to the versions from upstream, we > have to go back to perl-XML-LibXSLT <= 1.59 (there's already a spec > for this in SVN). for packages that are as widely used as these, i'm > OK with offering versions that replace packages from upstream, since > their absence is really crippling. > > -shuff > Well as I said I am for a very strict policy. I would rather start over and never ever package anything which is in base after the lessons learned so far. >From what i see in the buildlogs/repo there never was perl-XML-LibXML available from rpmforge before the version 1.70 and the only version for perl-XML-LibXSLT is 1.59. So remove perl-XML-LibXM do nothing with perl-XML-LibXML-Common (the packages are available) and we're done. ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
