On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 06:08:49PM +0200, Iain Arnell wrote: >> >> Interesting though this is, why are we trying to bootstrap the entire >> rebuild? Perl 5.14 is sufficiently compatible with 5.12 that we can >> continue to provide perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.*) in perl-5.14.1 rpm >> until the rebuild is (nearly) complete and only need to worry about >> bootstrapping the arch-specific stuff (a much smaller problem set with >> no circular deps that affected my rebuild in mock). Once all the >> arch-specific stuff is rebuilt, all of the noarch packages should just >> work (except those with real failures due to new features - mostly >> regex stringification messing up tests). >> > The noarch compatibility between 5.12 and 5.14 is almost perfect, but this > could not be true in future upgrades. Being able to bootstrap perl fully > automatically is great benefit. E.g we plan converting fractional versions to > version object strings (due to compatibility with RPM), so bootstrap build is > wanted prerequisite. (Not mentioning moving packages between distributions or > testing other crazy ideas like parallel installation of different Perl > versions). I remember 5.12 rebuild and it was horror because of mixing old and > new builds. If new Perl is going to be released each year, we need to have > automated solution that can deal with all (ok. almost all) potential problems > the Perl rebase can bring. Sure, full bootstrap rebuild would be nice to have. But wouldn't it be better to work out the details locally using mock first? We're now approaching the fourth week of this mass rebuild and still have at least 700 packages to go.... The branch/feature freeze is already less than one month away. -- Iain. -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
