Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 635608 - www-servers/nginx-1.13.6-r1 perl-cleaner needed to reinstall
Summary: www-servers/nginx-1.13.6-r1 perl-cleaner needed to reinstall
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Current packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Perl team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: perl-cleaner-rebuild
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2017-10-27 17:04 UTC by Torbjörn Lönnemark
Modified: 2019-10-13 02:12 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Torbjörn Lönnemark 2017-10-27 17:04:55 UTC
Filing this in accordance with the perl-cleaner output:

 * It seems like perl-cleaner had to rebuild some packages.                                               
 *                                                                                                        
 * If you have just updated your major Perl version (e.g. from 5.20.2 to 5.22.0),                         
 * and have run perl-cleaner _after_ that update, then this means most likely                             
 * that these packages are buggy. Please file a bug on http://bugs.gentoo.org/ and                        
 * report that perl-cleaner needed to reinstall the following list:                                       
 *   www-servers/nginx:mainline                                                                           

This was after upgrading from dev-lang/perl-5.24.2 to dev-lang/perl-5.26.1.

The message persists when re-running perl-cleaner.

app-admin/perl-cleaner-2.26 in case that matters.
Comment 1 Alexey Shildyakov 2018-10-02 07:30:23 UTC
I think the best solution of having many reports is to make only one bug with the whole list of applications involved in the case. Don't you think so, devs?

Should we merge this with the earliest non-resolved report about such type of case into bug 589874 ?