On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 12:17:56PM +0300, Damyan Ivanov wrote: > [d-release CC-ed for oppinion] > [please CC at least debian-perl]
> -=| Christian Hammers, Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 08:24:50PM +0200 |=- > > > > On 2007-06-23 Matthias Klose wrote: > > > > > Package: libdbi-perl > > > > > This package has been indentified as one with header files in > > > > > /usr/include matching 'long *double'. Please close this bug report > > > > > if it is a false positive, or rename the package accordingly. > > > > The libdbi-perl package has no files in /usr/include. The long double > > > > is only in a header file that is hidden deep in /usr/lib/perl5. > > > > Does it make sense to link against /usr/lib/perl5/auto/DBI/DBI.so? > > > > Do I really have to rename the pacakge? And if so to libdbi-perl-ldbl or > > > > to libdbi-perlldbl? > > What do you think? > I think that /usr/lib/perl5/auto/DBI/DBI.so is used only by perl's > Autoloader. This means we only have to depend on a perl that is compiled > with the new glibc/gcc (and not rename the package). > I guess we can use 5.8.8.11-1 as the one in testing (5.8.8-7) is the > same as in stable anyway (and thus uses 64-bit long doubles)? It appears that libdbi-perl is included in the list for the ldbl transition because of the file /usr/lib/perl5/auto/DBI/dbipport.h. I don't believe that anything in Debian builds against this file, but then I also don't know why it's in the package at all. If other packages do build against this header, then there is at least potentially an ABI change that needs to be handled. If this header is dead weight, then no changes need to be made to the libdbi-perl package for this bug report (not even "depending on a perl that is compiled with the new glibc/gcc"). Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
