Note: This is a beta release of Red Hat Bugzilla 5.0. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Also email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback here.

Bug 235553

Summary: perl.ppc64 @INC problem, perl.ppc conflicts
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Christopher Murtagh <christopher.murtagh>
Component: perlAssignee: Marcela Mašláňová <mmaslano>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: David Lawrence <dkl>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 9CC: galak, perl-devel, triage
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: ppc64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard: bzcl34nup
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-07-03 07:46:03 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Christopher Murtagh 2007-04-07 05:18:36 UTC
Description of problem:

 perl.ppc64's @INC doesn't include paths where most perl binary packages are,
perl-BerkeleyDB.ppc for example. 

[root@mybox~]# locate

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

 current (from base)

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install perl.ppc, perl.ppc64, install perl-BerkelyDB.
2. Then perl -e 'use BerkeleyDB; exit;'
3. There is no step 3... heh, there is no step 3.
Actual results:

Can't locate in @INC (@INC contains:
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.7
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.6 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.7
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6 /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.5
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl /usr/lib64/perl5/5.8.8/ppc64-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8) at /usr/sbin/postgrey line 14.

Expected results:

Successful compilation and exit without error.

Additional info:

The workaround was to yum erase perl.ppc64, fetch the perl.ppc rpm and rpm -i
--replacepkgs --replacefiles (because they both dump perl in /usr/bin/perl, so
removing the perl.ppc64 still left the 64 bit binary).

Comment 1 Marcela Mašláňová 2008-02-21 15:09:18 UTC
*** Bug 213285 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 2 Bug Zapper 2008-04-04 06:47:36 UTC
Fedora apologizes that these issues have not been resolved yet. We're
sorry it's taken so long for your bug to be properly triaged and acted
on. We appreciate the time you took to report this issue and want to
make sure no important bugs slip through the cracks.

If you're currently running a version of Fedora Core between 1 and 6,
please note that Fedora no longer maintains these releases. We strongly
encourage you to upgrade to a current Fedora release. In order to
refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs
for releases which are no longer maintained and closing them.

If this bug is still open against Fedora Core 1 through 6, thirty days
from now, it will be closed 'WONTFIX'. If you can reporduce this bug in
the latest Fedora version, please change to the respective version. If
you are unable to do this, please add a comment to this bug requesting
the change.

Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled
these issues to this point.

The process we are following is outlined here:

We will be following the process here: to ensure this
doesn't happen again.

And if you'd like to join the bug triage team to help make things
better, check out

Comment 3 Marcela Mašláňová 2008-05-05 11:55:04 UTC
The multilib problem wasn't still solved for ppc64.

Comment 4 David Woodhouse 2008-05-05 12:38:57 UTC
Well, rpm now favours 32-bit binaries so the test case should now pass, because
you'll get a 32-bit /usr/bin/perl and it'll be able to find the BerkeleyDB module.

Comment 5 Bug Zapper 2008-05-14 02:44:44 UTC
Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA.
More information and reason for this action is here: