Bug 56325
| Summary: | Perl is badly out of date - should be upgraded immediately to version 5.6.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Linux | Reporter: | Need Real Name <tfurnish> |
| Component: | perl | Assignee: | Chip Turner <cturner> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | David Lawrence <dkl> |
| Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 7.2 | CC: | jodym, rhbz, shishz |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | i386 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2001-12-06 21:23:11 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Need Real Name
2001-11-15 17:17:15 UTC
Here here, couldn't agree more. Every major Linux distribution has had perl-5.6.1 for some time now: SuSE since Wed Jun 20 2001 Mandrake since Apr 9 2001 PLD since Apr 12 2001 Vinelinux since Jun 15 2001 Conectiva since Sep 16 2001 Then what exactly is the reason to still ship a perl version that has all the shortcomings described above (and I can attest to every single one of them) ? This really makes me wonder: why are all bugs reported here left as NEW ?? Is it really too much trouble to even put in one line saying `sorry we're still working on this' or `security' or whatever. Really, anything is better than just ignoring the issues. This must be company policy then. Ah wait, here's the answer in the latest python.spec: Name: python Obsoletes: perl HTH 5.6.1 is now available in rawhide |