On Wed, 3 Sep 2008, John Summerfield wrote:


James Antill wrote:



pirut can already do that, as can PK (as a stand alone tool, although
it requires the PK backend).
pirut isn't useful without graphics, and I don't ordinarily use graphics on
machines I administer remotely.


I don't know what PK is.


Fedora or bleeding edge leakage, I think ... perhaps
PackageKit
<?>


-- Russ herrold
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

Gavin,

Gavin Carr wrote:
As others have reported, this seems to fix the main speed issues people
were complaining about.


But it doesn't seem to have changed the overload referencing semantics
that DBIx::Class::StartupCheck tests for - this still fails on the new
perl:


Two things, firstly - no one else in any of the bug reports has
mentioned this DBIx issue - so, I am happy to ignore that in this bug
case specifically since it does not break what was previous behavior.


Secondly, neither Nicholas nor Vipul have replied to my emails asking
for help, and i think 4 days is a fair amount of time to timeout on.


So unless anyone has reason to not push these perl packages, I'd like to
get them out there.


--
Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

On Wed, 2008-09-03 at 11:45 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> <snip>

> Secondly, neither Nicholas nor Vipul have replied to my emails asking
> for help, and i think 4 days is a fair amount of time to timeout on.

You might want to allow and extra day or two because of the long holiday
weekend in the U.S. Many folks start it early and come back late, to
mountains of e-mail and paperwork and catch-up activities.

> So unless anyone has reason to not push these perl packages, I'd like to
> get them out there.

Regardless of the holiday thing, I don't see why you shouldn't make it
available with, at most, a minor caveat for those who want to jump on it.

>
>

--
Bill

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, Karanbir Singh wrote:


David Hrbác wrote:

how come? What's the difference between C5 and C4 fasttrack repo? I
don't remember having any announcement.


The C4 fasttrack repo is built in sync with upstream, there is no
fasttrack on C5 ( go look at mirror.centos.org ).


Karanbir,

Is there a reason why there is no fasttrack for CentOS-5 ? I do see
packages available from Red Hat, although I cannot find any fastrack SRPMs
directory on ftp.redhat.com.


--
-- dag wieers, dag@centos.org, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

Dag Wieers napsal(a):
> Karanbir,
>
> Is there a reason why there is no fasttrack for CentOS-5 ? I do see
> packages available from Red Hat, although I cannot find any fastrack
> SRPMs directory on ftp.redhat.com.
>


Dag,
there has been a bunch of packages released on RH FT yesterday. But I do
not know any special open RPMS source for them now. Maybe on RHN. It
seems to me, that RPMS packages are provided within OS RPMS, see:

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2008-0646.html
http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2008-0844.html
etc. are in
http://ftp.linux.cz/pub/linux/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/os/SRPMS/?C=M;O=D
DH
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Dag Wieers <dag@centos.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>
>> David Hrbác wrote:
>>>
>>> how come? What's the difference between C5 and C4 fasttrack repo? I
>>> don't remember having any announcement.
>>
>> The C4 fasttrack repo is built in sync with upstream, there is no
>> fasttrack on C5 ( go look at mirror.centos.org ).
>
> Karanbir,
>
> Is there a reason why there is no fasttrack for CentOS-5 ? I do see packages
> available from Red Hat, although I cannot find any fastrack SRPMs directory
> on ftp.redhat.com.
>

I think that is the major reason... if the packages are not available
from ftp.redhat.com, they are harder to say they are build from
upstream.


--
Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Dag Wieers <dag@centos.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, Karanbir Singh wrote:

>>> The C4 fasttrack repo is built in sync with upstream, there is no
>>> fasttrack on C5 ( go look at mirror.centos.org ).
>>
>> Karanbir,
>>
>> Is there a reason why there is no fasttrack for CentOS-5 ? I do see packages
>> available from Red Hat, although I cannot find any fastrack SRPMs directory
>> on ftp.redhat.com.
>>
>
> I think that is the major reason... if the packages are not available
> from ftp.redhat.com, they are harder to say they are build from
> upstream.

I just randomly picked up 7 to 8 packages in the FasTrack errata and
checked to see if their srpms are available. I did find them all at
ftp.redhat.com.

Dag, there is no fastrack SRPMs directory. The files are mixed with
all other srpms.

Akemi
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

On 27/08/2008, at 6:57 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 3:11 PM, Scott Silva <ssilva@sgvwater.com>
wrote:

on 8-26-2008 2:08 PM Karanbir Singh spake the following:


Akemi Yagi wrote:


On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 1:30 PM, Florin Andrei <florin@andrei.myip.org
>

wrote:


If your Perl apps are unusually slow on CentOS 5, have a look at
this

blog:

http://blog.vipul.net/2008/08/24/redhat-perl-what-a-tragedy/


Summary: The Upstream Vendor version of Perl has a patch to the
"bless[]" function that makes it /extremely/ slow.


Reliable info heard on the grapevine indicates 5.3 would have the
fix's

required.


So that means about 6 months away from a fix?



Unless upstream bundles a hotfix that is available for people...



Such a hotfix was released in the last couple of days. A big moment
for RHEL/CentOS + Perl users.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos