Re: Updating perl 5.36.0 => 5.42.2 - some questions

[Adolf Belka <adolf.belka@ipfire.org>]

Hi Matthias,

On 20/06/2026 13:43, Adolf Belka wrote:
> Hallo Matthias,
> 
> Sorry for late reply. I am a bit tied up with other things that are keeping me busy at the moment.
> 
> On 18/06/2026 13:56, Matthias Fischer wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On 16.06.2026 13:49, Michael Tremer wrote:
>>> No worries, I wasn’t particularly quick with my response.
>>>
>>> What you sent looks good to me. I will reply to those emails once I review them.
>>
>> No problem, take your time. But since I was warned that building could
>> be ok, but starting the firewall (e.g.) could run into errors, I set up
>> my - offline - testmachine and couldn't find any (starting) errors.
>>
>> But: could 'someone' (Adolf(!?) ;-) ), install this build with this perl
>> update and test it *online*? I don't know if this makes a really *big*
>> difference, but I would feel better...
> 
> Yes, I will have a go at this but it might not be till the week after next.

I got some time to be able to have a go at this.

I took your update patches and applied them to a latest CU204 build set. That went fine with just a couple of issues due to newer changes in CU204.

perl-netsnmpd has been updated so the patch for the PAK-VER update failed to work and there is a new module perl-Encode-Locale. So I manually did the changes for those two modules. The build then worked without any issues.

I then installed the iso created from that build. Everything looked fine so I restored a CU202 backup. I then checked all the WUI pages with special focus on all then ones that I am actively using. Everything worked as expected.

It all looks to be working fine to me.

Congratulations, Matthias, on a successful perl update. I think this should be able to be put into CU204.

Regards,

Adolf.

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Adolf.
> 
>>
>> Best
>> Matthias
>>>> On 16 Jun 2026, at 12:47, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer@ipfire.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 16.06.2026 13:20, Michael Tremer wrote:
>>>>> Hello Matthias,
>>>>
>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>
>>>>> Yes, this is a bug update because there are plenty of modules built after the main package.
>>>>>
>>>>> The best way would be to update them one by one - i.e. commit them one by one. But since this is a lot, I would be happy to listen to any other proposals.
>>>>
>>>> Ups. Just saw your mail - a few seconds after I pushed the whole thing,
>>>> sorry.
>>>>
>>>> Take a look and decide - its really huge... ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>> Matthias
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 14 Jun 2026, at 22:04, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer@ipfire.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12.06.2026 13:19, Adolf Belka wrote:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> Feel free to do so but maybe you should also look at updating the perl package itself.
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did. But I'm not quite sure what to do next and need a hint.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After "a few" rootfile-adjustments I got a build based on 'next' with
>>>>>> 'perl 5.42.2' that is building without any errors. No seen problems.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adjusting the rootfile for the new perl version was a bit...extensive,
>>>>>> but I think I managed it. Build is running without any errors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But there are about 70 rootfiles from 'common' to 'packages' who thought
>>>>>> they were all alone now and wanted to come along. They all contained the
>>>>>> perl version string '5.36.0', which now had to be changed to 5.42.2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think I need to push these files together with the actual perl update.
>>>>>> This will take some place for an update... Since this is my first perl
>>>>>> update I was a bit surprised how many files were affected.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would this be ok? Updating perl leads to about ~70 files that need to be
>>>>>> updated too and pushed because of changed rootfiles?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best
>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>