Dag Wieers wrote: > On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Karanbir Singh wrote: > >>> should explore the problem further with TUV and the CentOS >>> community. If a fix is not forthcoming from TUV, I reluctantly suggest >>> that we get together with the CentOS people and fork this portion of >>> the distro, perhaps standardizing on Perl 5.10 . There are people >>> in the Perl community ready to assist us. >> >> While forking the whole perl subsection of the distro is a bit >> drastic, I am quite happy to have a perl in C5Plus. Does someone want >> to get in touch with Keith and get a summary on what needs fixing in >> this case ? Also - if the conversation was to take place on >> centos-devel list, would be much cooler. >> >> Upstream have said the fix will be in 5U3, and considering that might >> be still a few months away, could we get something sorted before then >> ? > > To be honest, if this problem was part of RHEL5 since its inception and > only a few people until now have actually been bugged by it. I don't see > a good reason to release something now only because someone was able to > make a big poo out of it and got to slashdot. I don't know whether I've been affected by the problem or not, and I don't think many who don't do their own perling would. A lot of the things I run are set to run when I'm not present, and if I'd upgraded my C4 systems to C5 I might not notice if some jobs went from taking a few minutes to an hour and more, depending of course, on how many: assuredly, if the system went to loadaverage >20 I would. And, I have a C5 box that does do this, and I don't know why. It is, however, a fresh install and not an upgrade. And I don't particularly think that Perl is the problem, though it could be. -- Cheers John -- spambait 1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu -- Advice http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375 You cannot reply off-list:-)