On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 06:45:33 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers <dag@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 9 Dec 2004, Bernd Radinger wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 11:27:03 -0500, A1tmblwd@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > <A1tmblwd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Dag Wieers <dag@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > >On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 A1tmblwd@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > > > >> Dag Wieer's package has the least dependencies. After my last > > > >> experience this would appear to be for the good. The code for > > > >> perl-XML-Parser comes from a common source, www.cpan.org. So, why the > > > >> difference in dependencies? Why are third-party packagers not using the > > > >> source rpm and spec file from Fedora Core so that this difference in > > > >> dependencies does not occur? > > > > > > > >Because at the point that this was packaged, there was no alternative. My > > > >original package existed before any official one. > > > > > > Dag, please clarify. Do you mean that you were the first to put out a perl-XML-Parser for a Redhat/Fedora release and that RedHat/Fedora later added the module to their distribution or do you mean that you were the first to release a package based on CPAN's 2.34 code base? > > > > probably the latter, because RH8.0 came with that package already: > > > > /pub/redhat/redhat-8.0/base/i386/RPMS/perl-XML-Parser-2.31-12.i386.rpm > > > > http://dag.wieers.com/packages/perl-XML-Parser/perl-XML-Parser.spec > > * Sat Dec 20 2003 Dag Wieers <dag@xxxxxxxxxx> - 2.34-0 > > - Initial package. (using DAR) > > And at this point RH 8.0 was already EOL. no --> https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh8-errata.html and RH9, FC1 and RHEL3 came with perl-XML-Parser too already -- Bernd
