On 11 June 2011 23:52, Pascal Terjan wrote:
> Thanks for helping but
> 1) Please use a better changelog message, like "Rebuild for perl
> 5.14". Increase rel for rebuild is not interesting when looking at the
> history of a package.
we should really reject "one word" commit messages, at least on
On 11/06/12 16:02 -0700, Thomas Spuhler wrote:
> I am not a perl guru. I agreed with sander85 to start at the end so we don't
> both work on the same packages.
thanks for your help!
> I used this list: http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/data/src.txt
the list to use is:
$ urpmf --requires :perlapi-5.1
On Saturday, June 11, 2011 02:52:43 pm Pascal Terjan wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 17:00, Thomas Spuhler wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 11, 2011 03:33:18 am Olivier Blin wrote:
> >> Jerome Quelin writes:
> >> > hi,
> >> >
> >> > perl 5.14.0 should arrive soon. it compiles fine on both i586 &
>
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 17:00, Thomas Spuhler wrote:
> On Saturday, June 11, 2011 03:33:18 am Olivier Blin wrote:
>> Jerome Quelin writes:
>> > hi,
>> >
>> > perl 5.14.0 should arrive soon. it compiles fine on both i586 & x86_64,
>> > and it seem we fixed the only problem arisen in perl-URPM.
>>
On Saturday, June 11, 2011 03:33:18 am Olivier Blin wrote:
> Jerome Quelin writes:
> > hi,
> >
> > perl 5.14.0 should arrive soon. it compiles fine on both i586 & x86_64,
> > and it seem we fixed the only problem arisen in perl-URPM.
> >
> > since other packages need to be rebuilt in the same lo
Jerome Quelin writes:
> hi,
>
> perl 5.14.0 should arrive soon. it compiles fine on both i586 & x86_64,
> and it seem we fixed the only problem arisen in perl-URPM.
>
> since other packages need to be rebuilt in the same loop, and given that
> urpmi is written in perl, it needs a special treatmen
