Re: [suggest] broken dependencies for some perl modules on RHEL4
Am Donnerstag, den 10.06.2010, 15:01 -0400 schrieb Dave B: If up2date is broken, fine... unfortunately, I think RHEL4 is in a state where that particular bug won't be fixed by redhat, now. So, it would be good if the appropriate packages from rpmforge could be patched to work around the problem. Once done, please bump the version numbers so that yum will install the new packages over the ones w. the incorrect dependencies. thanks. Well this is really a big workload. This line: find . -name perl-* | xargs grep -l perl .. 5.00| wc -l returns 127, so we are talking of ~100 packages to edit. ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] Version 4.0.8 of lftp is out
On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 06:19 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: lftp has an update published to version 4.0.8 with some minor bugfixes. I just tested the existing 4.0.7 spec file from RPMforge, updated to the 4.0.8 release, and it works fine. 4.0.8 SPEC has already been committed to the SVN yesterday. This is exactly the reason why we are asking to check the SVN out first, instead of ripping the SPECs out of SRPMs. Should I send a .spec file with the one line change and a forged updated '%changelog', or can I ask you wonderful folks upstream to get that into play, please? I think asking the wonderful folk of Dag to rebuild will do, but since his is the person who has committed the SPEC I assume he already has it on his mind, so you should just wait until the next rebuild happens. -- Sincerely yours, Yury V. Zaytsev ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] Version 4.0.8 of lftp is out
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Yury V. Zaytsev wrote: On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 06:19 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: Should I send a .spec file with the one line change and a forged updated '%changelog', or can I ask you wonderful folks upstream to get that into play, please? I think asking the wonderful folk of Dag to rebuild will do, but since his is the person who has committed the SPEC I assume he already has it on his mind, so you should just wait until the next rebuild happens. [...@moria ~]# rpm -q lftp lftp-4.0.8-1.el5.rf.x86_64 I think it should have hit the mirrors yesterday already. -- -- dag wieers, d...@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors] ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
[suggest] Re: broken dependencies for some perl modules on RHEL4
Though, perhaps not all of them are broken? I think both myself and someone else have mentioned just the same 3 packages causing the issue. On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 12:00 +0100, suggest-requ...@lists.rpmforge.net wrote: Message: 2 Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:57:00 +0200 From: Christoph Maser cma...@gmx.de Subject: Re: [suggest] broken dependencies for some perl modules on RHEL4 To: suggest@lists.rpmforge.net Message-ID: 1276243020.12228.36.ca...@hub8071nc4.financial.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Am Donnerstag, den 10.06.2010, 15:01 -0400 schrieb Dave B: If up2date is broken, fine... unfortunately, I think RHEL4 is in a state where that particular bug won't be fixed by redhat, now. So, it would be good if the appropriate packages from rpmforge could be patched to work around the problem. Once done, please bump the version numbers so that yum will install the new packages over the ones w. the incorrect dependencies. thanks. Well this is really a big workload. This line: find . -name perl-* | xargs grep -l perl .. 5.00| wc -l returns 127, so we are talking of ~100 packages to edit. -- David William Botsch Programmer/Analyst CNF Computing bot...@cnf.cornell.edu ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] Re: broken dependencies for some perl modules on RHEL4
Am Freitag, den 11.06.2010, 08:19 -0400 schrieb Dave B: Though, perhaps not all of them are broken? I think both myself and someone else have mentioned just the same 3 packages causing the issue. I was just following the argumentation why they are broken. I will have a look at those files when I have some time. Offtopic: Could you please not top-post and also all of your replys seem to have broken references/in-reply-to headers. At last evolution does not sort them into the thread. ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
Re: [suggest] Version 4.0.8 of lftp is out
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 7:19 AM, Dag Wieers d...@wieers.com wrote: On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Yury V. Zaytsev wrote: On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 06:19 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: Should I send a .spec file with the one line change and a forged updated '%changelog', or can I ask you wonderful folks upstream to get that into play, please? I think asking the wonderful folk of Dag to rebuild will do, but since his is the person who has committed the SPEC I assume he already has it on his mind, so you should just wait until the next rebuild happens. [...@moria ~]# rpm -q lftp lftp-4.0.8-1.el5.rf.x86_64 I think it should have hit the mirrors yesterday already. Thanks, I was checking a mirror. Boy, you guys are fast. ___ suggest mailing list suggest@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
