On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 09:02:53AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi Bill
>
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 08:35:39AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > Hi Bill
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 08:25:31PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 08:31:51AM +0100, Salvatore B
Hi Bill
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 08:35:39AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi Bill
>
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 08:25:31PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 08:31:51AM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > > Hi Dominic
> > >
> > > Only read trough yet (but not native
On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 21:13:06 +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> >From 87c527dce3a9f8dcaca7cf43f830ce9ff178f4e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Dominic Hargreaves
> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:11:29 +
> Subject: [PATCH] Describe the Perl upgrade trigger
>
> ---
> perl-policy.sgml | 20 +
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 09:13:06PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> +
> +Perl Package Upgrades
> +
> + Starting from perl 5.12.3-2, a dpkg trigger
> + named perl-major-upgrade will be triggered by the
> + postinst of the perl package during major
Hi Bill
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 08:25:31PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 08:31:51AM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > Hi Dominic
> >
> > Only read trough yet (but not native english speaker):
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:35:16PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 10:28:28PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 09:13:06PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 07:50:20PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:35:31PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 28 May 201
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 09:13:06PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 07:50:20PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:35:31PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > > On Sat, 28 May 2011 21:53:52 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > >
> > > > Is there progress
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 07:50:20PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:35:31PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > On Sat, 28 May 2011 21:53:52 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> >
> > > Is there progress on the implementation of this feature ?
> >
> > It's in perl 5.12.3 since th
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 08:31:51AM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi Dominic
>
> Only read trough yet (but not native english speaker):
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:35:16PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Dominic Hargreaves
> > ---
> > perl-policy.sgml | 20 +++
On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 19:50:20 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > Is there progress on the implementation of this feature ?
> > It's in perl 5.12.3 since the upload to unstable:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2011/05/msg6.html
> So are you seconding this policy amendment ?
If
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:35:31PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2011 21:53:52 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> > Is there progress on the implementation of this feature ?
>
> It's in perl 5.12.3 since the upload to unstable:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/201
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 09:53:52PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Is there progress on the implementation of this feature ?
>
> So far there are a single second and Niko partial objection.
>
> For my part, I think this is important that the feature be documented (if
> implemented)
> but not nece
On Sat, 28 May 2011 21:53:52 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Is there progress on the implementation of this feature ?
It's in perl 5.12.3 since the upload to unstable:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2011/05/msg6.html
Cheers,
gregor
--
.''`. Homepage: http://info.comod
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 09:36:35AM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:31:24PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:38:19PM +0200, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > > While I do think this is a nice solution, I've got a couple of concerns:
> > >
> > > - is this overk
Dominic Hargreaves writes:
> From: Dominic Hargreaves
> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:11:29 +
> Subject: [PATCH] Describe the Perl upgrade trigger
> Signed-off-by: Dominic Hargreaves
> ---
> perl-policy.sgml | 20
> 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> d
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:31:24PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:38:19PM +0200, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > While I do think this is a nice solution, I've got a couple of concerns:
> >
> > - is this overkill? Would it be enough for the long running daemons to just
> > re
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:38:19PM +0200, Niko Tyni wrote:
> While I do think this is a nice solution, I've got a couple of concerns:
>
> - is this overkill? Would it be enough for the long running daemons to just
> register an interest in a file trigger on /usr/bin/perl ? This means
> minor p
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:35:16PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> +
> +
> +Perl Package Upgrades
> +
> + Starting from perl 5.12.3-2, a dpkg trigger
> + named perl-major-upgrade will be triggered by the
> + postinst of the perl package during maj
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 08:31:51AM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:35:16PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> > @@ -461,6 +461,26 @@ perl -MExtUtils::Embed -e ldopts
> > package must depend upon it explicitly.
> >
> >
> > +
> > +
> > +
Hi Dominic
Only read trough yet (but not native english speaker):
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:35:16PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Dominic Hargreaves
> ---
> perl-policy.sgml | 20
> 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/p
Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> A not-so-recent bug report, #230308, raised the issue of how a long-running
> program which would be broken (until restart) by a major Perl package upgrade
> (eg from 5.10 to 5.12) could be notified of such a restart. There was a rough
> consensus on that bug report tha
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.9.1.0
Dear Policy maintainers,
A not-so-recent bug report, #230308, raised the issue of how a long-running
program which would be broken (until restart) by a major Perl package upgrade
(eg from 5.10 to 5.12) could be notified of such a restart. There was a rough
22 matches
Mail list logo
