On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 02:07:30PM +0100, Steve Hay wrote: > On 4 July 2017 at 11:38, Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li> wrote: > > Great stuff, thanks! > > > > I note that the base.pm commit from Aristotle does not appear in > > blead yet (or maint-5.26). It's lesss urgent there given that the > > defaults changed but it still has applicability there given that > > people could unset -Ddefault_inc_excludes_dot. > > > > Of course none of this should block the release of the 5.24.2 or > > 5.22.4, but would be good if it didn't get forgotten - and indeed > > perlpolicy at least implies that all maint fixes should come via blead. > > > > I think this was deliberate, e.g. on 17 March Sawyer said (in reply to > Dave M) that nothing else on perl #127834 needs doing for 5.26.0 > (https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=127834#txn-1453921), and > on 24 March Dave M reverted the various dot-in-INC changes that were > then current in base.pm (commit 6ee05a9b91). > > The latter was done under perl #128769. Originally, the intent there > was to revert the patches thus far in favour of Aristotle's > forthcoming patch, but then it ended up going like this: > > Graham Knop: > > Can't we just revert the base.pm changes without putting anything > > extra in place? We're already removing . from @INC globally. There's > > little need for base.pm to have its own protections, especially given > > how broken the current implementation is. > > Sawyer: > > This makes sense. > > I spoke to Graham more about this on #p5p. There's no need to have an altered base.pm with 5.26.0 (because safe @INC is turned on by default anyway). When base.pm is released separately, it will simply be a different (and up-to-date) version. > > So we should undo the changes to base.pm in blead. Post 5.26 we could sync it with CPAN. > > However, I agree that it would make sense for the final base.pm > changes to be ported forward to 5.26 (and blead, pending a new CPAN > release of base?) because of the possibility of people unsetting the > default exclusion of dot in @INC. > > If there is agreement on that (or at least, no disagreement) then I > will go ahead with that shortly, when I get things moving on 5.26.0. > > (This is assuming that the new base.pm patch does indeed resolve the > problems that #128769 was originally about. I haven't checked that > yet, but need to do so anyway w.r.t. maint-5.2[24]...) In Debian, We have verified that the new patch (on top of our perl 5.20) does fix the packages which were broken by the earlier base.pm change: request-tracker4_4.2.8-3+deb8u1 libgraph-writer-dsm-perl_0.006-1 libclass-c3-xs-perl_0.13-2 libclass-c3-perl_0.26-1 libbio-das-lite-perl_2.04-1.1 So I'm reasonably confident in saying that it fixes #128769. Cheers, Dominic.Thread Previous | Thread Next