CentOS - Aug 2006 - Re: rhel 4.4 perl update looses weakref support?

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, nathan r. hruby wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, John Summerfield wrote:
> 
> > nathan r. hruby wrote:
> >
> > > I have a user running RT on a RHEL4 machine.  He recently did the
RHEL4.4
> > > update and now it appears that the Tree::Simple module (a
requirement of
> > > RT) is broken, as it was built with weakref support that was in a
prior
> > > perl package and it appears that the new perl-5.8.5-36 package
has lost
> > > that support.
> > > 
> > > Red Hat Bugzilla has nothing about this particular issue that I
can find.
> > > Anyone else experienced this?
> > > 
> > > Obviously, we're an .edu and thus can't call support and
actually expect
> > > help.  But before setting this user on bugzilla, I thought
I'd ask if
> > > anyone else might have any knowledge of this.  The Best Practical
RT Wiki
> > > has some info on this, but evidently the user tried the
suggestions there
> > > with no luck.
> >
> > Why not check the changelong (rpm -q perl --changelong | less), and
get the
> > source rpm and check the spec file (you could compare with the
previous
> > version), and if needs bem build it the way you want?
> 
> The changelog has nothing on this particular subject and I haven't had
a
> moment to peek at the source RPM's to see what has changed.
> 
> I really don't want to rebuild and maintain a separate perl instance if
I
> don't have to ;-)
It would be nice if the CentOS project had (and offered) a subversion 
repository where the SPEC file (and patches) of official SRPMs are stored 
(an tagged accordingly). This could be set up automatically and fed 
automatically.

Having something like this would help a lot of people trace problems and 
it would help people rebuilding packages to see what changes have been 
made by Red Hat. Fastrack and beta packages would give a few of ongoing 
changes and people could subscribe to the "svn-commits" as the are
being
made.

Of course, this would not hold the CentOS specific changes (or other 
CentOS related projects) only the upstream changes. Otherwise it would be 
harder to follow.

If this sounds interesting, I'm willing to offer to design and implement 
this.

PS Sorry for replying to a different mailinglist, I actually wrote this 
mail and luckily I noticed in time it was not on a CentOS related 
mailinglist. :)

Kind regards,
--   dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  dag.wieers.com   --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]

Dag Wieers wrote:
> It would be nice if the CentOS project had (and offered) a subversion 
> repository where the SPEC file (and patches) of official SRPMs are stored 
> (an tagged accordingly). This could be set up automatically and fed 
> automatically.
Hi Dag,

we are going to be moving some of our services around in a few weeks
time, after that we can definitely look at this. I am happy to sort out
whatever is required - from our end.

-- 
Karanbir Singh : karan.org : 2522219 at icq