Currently this blocks an upgrade of the perl-bioperl package which requires: ExtUtils::Manifest >= 1.52 Without it, perl-bioperl 1.6.1 won't build, get this: Checking prerequisites... - ERROR: ExtUtils::Manifest (1.51_01) is installed, but we need version >= 1.52 According to the upstream developers it is necessary to be strict about this version. My original query: http://bioperl.org/pipermail/bioperl-l/2009-November/031529.html and the response: http://bioperl.org/pipermail/bioperl-l/2009-November/031538.html
I hope you don't need it for F-12. I'm okay with rawhide update.
(In reply to comment #1) > I hope you don't need it for F-12. I'm okay with rawhide update. Umm, yes, I do. Otherwise I won't be able to update bioperl for a whole release cycle, which means users won't be able to use the new bioperl in a stable Fedora release (which is a bug fix release) for at least 6 more months. I knew this would be an issue, so I brought it up with upstream and you can see their response: http://bioperl.org/pipermail/bioperl-l/2009-November/031538.html Suggested workarounds welcome.
The build is failing on missing CPAN package. As far as I know you shouldn't need CPAN, because it's used for auto install of missing packages. Maybe I'm wrong and you're simply missing requirement. I don't have problem with updating release of ExtUtils::Manifest, but I'm against creating zero update for perl. I'm usually fixing more bugs in an update so it take few weeks. In F-13 we are working on packaging perl-5.10.1, so the update there also take a few weeks. You can try as a workaround edit Makefile.PL and see whether the higher version is really needed.
(In reply to comment #3) > The build is failing on missing CPAN package. As far as I know you shouldn't > need CPAN, because it's used for auto install of missing packages. Maybe I'm > wrong and you're simply missing requirement. > I don't have problem with updating release of ExtUtils::Manifest, but I'm > against creating zero update for perl. I'm usually fixing more bugs in an > update so it take few weeks. In F-13 we are working on packaging perl-5.10.1, > so the update there also take a few weeks. > > You can try as a workaround edit Makefile.PL and see whether the higher version > is really needed. It is, as explained by upstream: http://bioperl.org/pipermail/bioperl-l/2009-November/031538.html but I may be able to workaround that because we probably don't need to create a MANIFEST during the package build.
Looks like ExtUtils::Manifest is at 1.56 in 5.10.1... I agree with Alex; we're supposed to be going to 5.10.1 in rawhide, F-11/F-12 Perl are essentially the same right now, and we haven't even released F-12 yet. We should be able to backport from 5.10.1 and leave this kicking around in updates-testing for a while... in F-11 at least.
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 12 development cycle. Changing version to '12'. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
In rawhide perl 5.10.1 contains ExtUtils::Manifest 1.56.