https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=997835
Bug 997835 depends on bug 992666, which changed state.
Bug 992666 Summary: perl-Language-Expr: FTBFS in rawhide
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=992666
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=997835
Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=997835
Fedora Admin XMLRPC Client fedora-admin-xml...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|mhron...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=997835
Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||p...@city-fan.org
---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=997835
--- Comment #4 from Miro Hrončok mhron...@redhat.com ---
I think that building a non-functional package is against the guidelines. But
it would certainly be better than now. Should I ask on packaging mailing list?
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=997835
--- Comment #5 from Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org ---
I don't think that's necessary. It's no less functioning than the current
situation, and it's upstream's current release, and upstream is aware of the
issue. At least people would be able
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=997835
--- Comment #6 from Miro Hrončok mhron...@redhat.com ---
While I agree with you, I've send the e-mail a minute ago. If nobody says
anything against it by the end of the week, I'll do it.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=997835
Upstream Release Monitoring upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
changed:
What|Removed |Added
