https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Module-Starter-1.62-3.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Module-Starter-1.62-3.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
--- Comment #13 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #12)
If you do that, are you then going to post-bootstrap rebuild every package
that pulled in Module::Build during the bootstrap process, to make
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
--- Comment #6 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com ---
You are right that the patch is wrong. The only slnames that need a correction
are the LGPL's. I think more appropriate place for a dependency on
Software::License is Module::Build rather
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
--- Comment #8 from Richard Poole r...@guests.deus.net ---
Module::Build is used at module install time, so a dependency on
Software::License would effectively bring Software::License into any working
perl development setup, whereas a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
--- Comment #9 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #7)
(In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #6)
You are right that the patch is wrong. The only slnames that need a
correction are the LGPL's. I
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
--- Comment #10 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Richard Poole from comment #8)
Module::Build is used at module install time, so a dependency on
Software::License would effectively bring Software::License into any working
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|perl-Module-Starter-1.62-4.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
--- Comment #11 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com ---
Module::Build does not die on Software::License identifier if the
Software::License is not available since 0.4208-2-gf75aa88:
commit f75aa882772d6ebe3b18e27076b1bb124f91cec1
Author: Leon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
--- Comment #12 from Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org ---
(In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #9)
(In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #7)
(In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #6)
You are right that the patch is wrong. The only slnames
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|perl-Module-Starter should |perl-Module-Starter
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
perl-Module-Starter-1.62-3.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Module-Starter-1.62-3.fc21
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
perl-Module-Starter-1.62-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Module-Starter-1.62-2.fc20
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
perl-Module-Starter-1.62-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Module-Starter-1.62-2.fc19
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1152319
--- Comment #5 from Richard Poole r...@guests.deus.net ---
The patch you've applied fixes the case where Software::License is not
installed at the expense of breaking the case where Software::License *is*
installed - it changes the values of
19 matches
Mail list logo
