Bug#288580: [Logcheck-devel] Bug#288580: logtail: Logtail (not logcheck) needs perl 5.8 (Bug#252078 wrongly fixed)

[Jonas Smedegaard]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

clone 288580 -1
retitle -1 logtail: Please use getopts in a way usable with perl 5.6
tags -1 -pending
retitle 288580 logtail MUST depend on perl 5.8 (Debian Policy 11.9)
tags 288580 patch
tags 288580 important
stop downgrading policy-violating bugs, please!


The top part of this post belongs to bug#288580 and the bottom part
belongs to the cloned wishlist bug!


On 05-01-2005 23:09, maximilian attems wrote:

> backports fall clearly under the cat of wishlists.

Yes, and Policy violations are clearly important bugs.


>>Please do _not_ downgrade the severity: this bug is a violation of
>>Debian Policy 3.5!
> 
> no it is not, Perl 5.8.x is in sarge base,
> and this package is target for it!

Ah, correct. But a goal of Debian Policy is to define package
dependencies in a way independent of distributions. In the case of Perl
versions it is taken care of in a later chapter: Debian Policy 11.9 (and
Perl Policy 5.2).

Please do not downgrade severity again without discussion.


>>Yes. I know. And I know that they are both contained in the same
>>_source_ package.
>>
>>I explicitly talk about different _binary_ packages.
> 
> 
> ok, fixed. in current cvs.

Thanks.

And until that fix has reached sarge or you (convincingly!) argue
otherwise this bug stays important, ok?


>>>>Logtail (and not logcheck) should have a versioned dependency on perl.
>>>
>>>perhaps that can easily be addded,
>>
>>Sure. Patch provided - I did not think that was necessary, but obviously
>>I was wrong...
> 
> 
> the patch was asked for the getopts wish. 

I am aware that a request was made for the additional wish below - and I
explained my stand regarding such patch.

I provided the above patch to clarify the main issue of this bugreport.

Please _ignore_ the below for bug#288580 it has now been split to
hopefully not cause further confusion.


>>>but more importantly it should be in c and not in perl.
>>
>>Huh? Could you please explain?
> 
> 
> logtail _was_ written in c.
> and that may well get resurrected after sarge.

Ah. Thanks for clarifying.

I did not talk about the version in woody, but (regarding the wishlist
change below) the changes happening between 1.2.14 and 1.2.32.


>>Who introduced getopts in the code? I'd assume (s)he'd be able to come
>>up with a much smarter solution than I.
>>
>>If not, I'll pass it on if I figure out a better approach than simply
>>avoiding the getopts code change for the upgrade of my woody backport.
> 
> 
> due of time constraints patches are highly welcome. 

ok. No promise, but I will possibly give it a try...

Please keep this wishlist bugreport open until fixed.


 - Jonas


- --
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFB3HqEn7DbMsAkQLgRAoOJAJ47F3LiZgWw1uW2em0fCpvFkrFjxwCglRVl
4Nm3E8kmqMfOnE1OqJ2k4wg=
=CbOG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----