[users] Bug in perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf

[email builder]

Hello,

Lately I've been seeing this every day caused by sa-update (spamassassin
updater) run from cron:

Subroutine Net::DNS::Resolver::Base::AF_INET6 redefined at
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm line 65.
?at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/Net/DNS/Resolver/Base.pm
line 65I searched Google and saw that this issue was supposedly from 2008 and was
fixed.? The only helpful thing I found was a couple people recommending to
remove perl-IO-Socket-INET6.? I wanted to avoid the hassle of yum complaining
because I removed a package that is a dependency of others, so I asked for
help on the spamassassin and CentOS mailing lists.? In the end, the CentOS
list members seemed to help me find the cause:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.centos.general/121797

I had these (the seemingly relevant packages):

perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.51-2.fc6

perl-Net-DNS-0.63-1.el5.rfspamassassin-3.3.1-2.el5

I was encouraged to try not to mix rpms from different repos, so
I changed to the CentOS repo for perl-Net-DNS:

perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5

Still no luck, and eventually it was suggested that
perl-NetAddr-IP might be the cause.? After changing
it to CentOS repo, the bug has gone away:

perl-NetAddr-IP-4.027-5.el5_6

So it appears that perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf might have
a redundant function definition (AF_INET6) in it.

HTH and thank you for your service!!

[David Hrbáč]

Post by email builder
Hello,
Lately I've been seeing this every day caused by sa-update (spamassassin
Subroutine Net::DNS::Resolver::Base::AF_INET6 redefined at
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm line 65.
at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/Net/DNS/Resolver/Base.pm
line 65I searched Google and saw that this issue was supposedly from 2008 and was
fixed. The only helpful thing I found was a couple people recommending to
remove perl-IO-Socket-INET6. I wanted to avoid the hassle of yum complaining
because I removed a package that is a dependency of others, so I asked for
help on the spamassassin and CentOS mailing lists. In the end, the CentOS
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.centos.general/121797
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.51-2.fc6
perl-Net-DNS-0.63-1.el5.rfspamassassin-3.3.1-2.el5
I was encouraged to try not to mix rpms from different repos, so
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5
Still no luck, and eventually it was suggested that
perl-NetAddr-IP might be the cause. After changing
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.027-5.el5_6
So it appears that perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf might have
a redundant function definition (AF_INET6) in it.
HTH and thank you for your service!!

Hello,
Seems to me that you are still using the mix of repos. Packages from RF
work fine.

root at specs2:1280:279:/$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6
perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP| sort
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.57-2.el5.rfx
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf
perl-Net-DNS-0.66-1.el5.rfx
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx

root at specs2:1279:278:/$ sa-update -D
Jan 10 15:07:53.098 [32233] dbg: logger: adding facilities: all
Jan 10 15:07:53.098 [32233] dbg: logger: logging level is DBG
Jan 10 15:07:53.098 [32233] dbg: generic: SpamAssassin version 3.3.2
Jan 10 15:07:53.098 [32233] dbg: generic: Perl 5.008008, PREFIX=/usr,
DEF_RULES_DIR=/usr/share/spamassassin,
LOCAL_RULES_DIR=/etc/mail/spamassassin,
LOCAL_STATE_DIR=/var/lib/spamassassin
Jan 10 15:07:53.098 [32233] dbg: config: timing enabled
Jan 10 15:07:53.099 [32233] dbg: config: score set 0 chosen.
Jan 10 15:07:53.104 [32233] dbg: dns: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
Jan 10 15:07:53.104 [32233] dbg: dns: Net::DNS version: 0.66
Jan 10 15:07:53.104 [32233] dbg: generic: sa-update version svn917659
Jan 10 15:07:53.104 [32233] dbg: generic: using update directory:
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.003002
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: perl platform: 5.008008 linux
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Digest::SHA1, version 2.13
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
HTML::Parser, version 3.68
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed: Net::DNS,
version 0.66
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
NetAddr::IP, version 4.044
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Time::HiRes, version 1.9717
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Archive::Tar, version 1.56
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed: IO::Zlib,
version 1.10
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Digest::SHA1, version 2.13
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
MIME::Base64, version 3.07
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed: DB_File,
version 1.814
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Net::SMTP, version 2.29
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Mail::SPF, version v2.006
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
IP::Country::Fast, version 604.001
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Razor2::Client::Agent, version 2.84
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Net::Ident, version 1.23
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
IO::Socket::INET6, version 2.57
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
IO::Socket::SSL, version 1.44
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Compress::Zlib, version 2.037
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Mail::DKIM, version 0.39
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed: DBI,
version 1.616
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Getopt::Long, version 2.35
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
LWP::UserAgent, version 5.835
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
HTTP::Date, version 5.831
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Encode::Detect, version 1.01
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: gpg: Searching for 'gpg'
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: util: current PATH is:
/usr/kerberos/sbin:/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/lib64/ccache/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin
Jan 10 15:07:53.233 [32233] dbg: util: executable for gpg was found at
/usr/bin/gpg
Jan 10 15:07:53.233 [32233] dbg: gpg: found /usr/bin/gpg
Jan 10 15:07:53.233 [32233] dbg: gpg: release trusted key id list:
5E541DC959CB8BAC7C78DFDC4056A61A5244EC45
26C900A46DD40CD5AD24F6D7DEE01987265FA05B
0C2B1D7175B852C64B3CDC716C55397824F434CE
Jan 10 15:07:53.235 [32233] dbg: channel: attempting channel
updates.spamassassin.org
Jan 10 15:07:53.235 [32233] dbg: channel: update directory
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.003002/updates_spamassassin_org
Jan 10 15:07:53.235 [32233] dbg: channel: channel cf file
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.003002/updates_spamassassin_org.cf
Jan 10 15:07:53.236 [32233] dbg: channel: channel pre file
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.003002/updates_spamassassin_org.pre
Jan 10 15:07:53.236 [32233] dbg: channel: metadata version = 1227079
Jan 10 15:07:53.240 [32233] dbg: dns: 2.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org =>
1227079, parsed as 1227079
Jan 10 15:07:53.240 [32233] dbg: channel: current version is 1227079,
new version is 1227079, skipping channel
Jan 10 15:07:53.240 [32233] dbg: diag: updates complete, exiting with code 1

Regards,
DH

[Ned Slider]

Post by email builder

Post by email builder
Hello,
Lately I've been seeing this every day caused by sa-update (spamassassin
Subroutine Net::DNS::Resolver::Base::AF_INET6 redefined at
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm line 65.
at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/Net/DNS/Resolver/Base.pm
line 65I searched Google and saw that this issue was supposedly from 2008 and was
fixed. The only helpful thing I found was a couple people recommending to
remove perl-IO-Socket-INET6. I wanted to avoid the hassle of yum complaining
because I removed a package that is a dependency of others, so I asked for
help on the spamassassin and CentOS mailing lists. In the end, the CentOS
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.centos.general/121797
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.51-2.fc6
perl-Net-DNS-0.63-1.el5.rfspamassassin-3.3.1-2.el5
I was encouraged to try not to mix rpms from different repos, so
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5
Still no luck, and eventually it was suggested that
perl-NetAddr-IP might be the cause. After changing
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.027-5.el5_6
So it appears that perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf might have
a redundant function definition (AF_INET6) in it.
HTH and thank you for your service!!

Hello,
Seems to me that you are still using the mix of repos. Packages from RF
work fine.
root at specs2:1280:279:/$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6
perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP| sort
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.57-2.el5.rfx
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf
perl-Net-DNS-0.66-1.el5.rfx
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx

Indeed, and even some combinations work fine if you're not using IPv6:

$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6 perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP
package perl-IO-Socket-INET6 is not installed
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf.x86_64
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5.x86_64
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx.x86_64


PS - perl-Net-DNS latest upstream version is currently 0.67.

[David Hrbáč]

Post by Ned Slider
$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6 perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP
package perl-IO-Socket-INET6 is not installed
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf.x86_64
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5.x86_64
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx.x86_64
PS - perl-Net-DNS latest upstream version is currently 0.67.

Well I know:
64/87 * perl-Net-DNS: repo=0.66 upstream=0.67
I'd push the new spec file, but it seems to me that Dag is not building
the packages...
DH

[Nicolas Thierry-Mieg]

Post by Ned Slider

Post by David Hrbáč
root at specs2:1280:279:/$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6
perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP| sort
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.57-2.el5.rfx
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf
perl-Net-DNS-0.66-1.el5.rfx
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx

$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6 perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP
package perl-IO-Socket-INET6 is not installed
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf.x86_64
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5.x86_64
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx.x86_64

However perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf should be in RFX since el5 has
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.027-5.el5_6 .

[David Hrbáč]

Post by Ned Slider
$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6 perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP
package perl-IO-Socket-INET6 is not installed
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf.x86_64
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5.x86_64
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx.x86_64
PS - perl-Net-DNS latest upstream version is currently 0.67.

Well I know:
64/87 * perl-Net-DNS: repo=0.66 upstream=0.67
I'd push the new spec file, but it seems to me that Dag is not building
the packages...
DH

[Nicolas Thierry-Mieg]

Post by Ned Slider

Post by David Hrbáč
root at specs2:1280:279:/$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6
perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP| sort
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.57-2.el5.rfx
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf
perl-Net-DNS-0.66-1.el5.rfx
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx

$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6 perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP
package perl-IO-Socket-INET6 is not installed
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf.x86_64
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5.x86_64
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx.x86_64

However perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf should be in RFX since el5 has
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.027-5.el5_6 .

[email builder]

Post by email builder

Post by email builder
Lately I've been seeing this every day caused by sa-update
(spamassassin
Subroutine Net::DNS::Resolver::Base::AF_INET6 redefined at
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm line 65.
? at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/Net/DNS/Resolver/Base.pm
line 65I searched Google and saw that this issue was supposedly from 2008 and was
fixed.? The only helpful thing I found was a couple people recommending to
remove perl-IO-Socket-INET6.? I wanted to avoid the hassle of yum

complaining

Post by email builder
because I removed a package that is a dependency of others, so I asked for
help on the spamassassin and CentOS mailing lists.? In the end, the CentOS
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.centos.general/121797
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.51-2.fc6
perl-Net-DNS-0.63-1.el5.rf
spamassassin-3.3.1-2.el5
I was encouraged to try not to mix rpms from different repos, so
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5
Still no luck, and eventually it was suggested that
perl-NetAddr-IP might be the cause.? After changing
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.027-5.el5_6
So it appears that perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf might have
a redundant function definition (AF_INET6) in it.

Seems to me that you are still using the mix of repos. Packages from RF
work fine.

Sure, yes.? As you see above, I have spamassassin installed from CentOS
repo as well as others.? My problem was fixed by not using the RepoForge
version of perl-NetAddr-IP any more.

To me it would seem common that many people
pick up packages from RepoForge that they can't get from CenOS or need
for some other reason.? And it seems logical that the packages should
work together as best possible.? I realize version problems may be hard to
overcome in all cases, but I guess I thought a subroutine being defined in
a place that it shouldn't might be something to fix in your repo.

Post by email builder
root at specs2:1280:279:/$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6
perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP| sort
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.57-2.el5.rfx
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf
perl-Net-DNS-0.66-1.el5.rfx
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx

[David Hrbáč]

Sure, yes. As you see above, I have spamassassin installed from
CentOS repo as well as others. My problem was fixed by not using the
RepoForge version of perl-NetAddr-IP any more. To me it would seem
common that many people pick up packages from RepoForge that they
can't get from CenOS or need for some other reason. And it seems
logical that the packages should work together as best possible. I
realize version problems may be hard to overcome in all cases, but I
guess I thought a subroutine being defined in a place that it
shouldn't might be something to fix in your repo.

As my reply to centos list. These packages are within RF email stack
solution. So we want users to have them all from RF, not just particular
ones.
DH

[email builder]

Post by David Hrbáč

Post by email builder
Sure, yes.? As you see above, I have spamassassin installed from
CentOS repo as well as others.? My problem was fixed by not using the
RepoForge version of perl-NetAddr-IP any more. To me it would seem
common that many people pick up packages from RepoForge that they
can't get from CenOS or need for some other reason.? And it seems
logical that the packages should work together as best possible.? I
realize version problems may be hard to overcome in all cases, but I
guess I thought a subroutine being defined in a place that it
shouldn't might be something to fix in your repo.

As my reply to centos list. These packages are within RF email stack
solution. So we want users to have them all from RF, not just particular
ones.

But why is perl-NetAddr-IP in your base repo?? Your FAQ says:

Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream packages
into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to be
confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with upstream can
enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can enable
the extras repository.

[David Hrbáč]

Post by email builder
Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream packages
into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to be
confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with upstream can
enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can enable
the extras repository.

Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue. It is caused
by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the last 5.x
release. Compare:
http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/
Yes, there are packages which have to be in RFX, have wrong version and
other issues. This is something I personally am not able to solve and
sort out. There's no one to move or remove packages but Dag. I can only
commit new spec file versions. I can't even build those new ones. So
because of that, not only that, I have to manage my own repos. :o( On
the other hand, there's something you can do about. Create the ticket on
GitHub.
DH

[email builder]

Post by David Hrbáč

Post by email builder
Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream packages
into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to be
confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with upstream can
enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can enable
? the extras repository.

Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue. It is caused
by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the last 5.x
http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/

Ah, I see.

Post by David Hrbáč
Yes, there are packages which have to be in RFX, have wrong version and
other issues. This is something I personally am not able to solve and
sort out. There's no one to move or remove packages but Dag. I can only
commit new spec file versions. I can't even build those new ones. So
because of that, not only that, I have to manage my own repos. :o( On
the other hand, there's something you can do about. Create the ticket on
GitHub.

OK, I've followed your advice.? I hope I did it in the right place - there
aren't really any other issues here:

https://github.com/repoforge/repoforge.github.com/issues/2

Thank you for your hard work.

[Ljubomir Ljubojevic]

Post by David Hrbáč

Post by email builder
Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream packages
into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to be
confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with upstream can
enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can enable
the extras repository.

Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue. It is caused
by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the last 5.x
http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/

You can always, as an temporary solution, exclude perl-NetAddr-IP from
RepoForge .repo file

Just add:

exclude=perl-NetAddr-IP to appropriate repo, and yum will not bother you
about this again.

[email builder]

Post by Ljubomir Ljubojevic

Post by David Hrbáč

? Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream
packages
? into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to
be
? confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with
upstream can
? enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
? packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can
enable
? ? the extras repository.

Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue. It is caused
by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the last 5.x
http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/

You can always, as an temporary solution, exclude perl-NetAddr-IP from
RepoForge .repo file
exclude=perl-NetAddr-IP to appropriate repo, and yum will not bother you
about this again.

Thank you for that.? Very helpful.

But I do hope Dag is out there somewhere too...

[Dag Wieers]

Post by email builder

Post by Ljubomir Ljubojevic

Post by David Hrbáč

? Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream
packages
? into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to
be
? confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with
upstream can
? enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
? packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can
enable
? ? the extras repository.

Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue. It is caused
by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the last 5.x
http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/

You can always, as an temporary solution, exclude perl-NetAddr-IP from
RepoForge .repo file
exclude=perl-NetAddr-IP to appropriate repo, and yum will not bother you
about this again.

Thank you for that.? Very helpful.
But I do hope Dag is out there somewhere too...

This should be fixed, if it is not, let me know.

We moved to a new location and I was without internet until last week. I
have rebuild everything in the queue and fixed the remaining issues that
related to removing packages. I still need to go over other issues,
especially those blocked by me...

[email builder]

Post by Dag Wieers

? ?? But why is perl-NetAddr-IP in your base repo?? Your FAQ
? ?? Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with
? ? upstream packages
? ?? into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who
?? want to be
? ?? confident that our packages will not cause conflicts
?? with upstream can
? ?? enable the base repository, and users who want newer
?? versions of
? ?? packages (and are willing to tolerate some package
?? conflicts) can enable
? ? ? the extras repository.

? Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue.
?? It is caused
? by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the
?? last 5.x
? http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
? http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/

? You can always, as an temporary solution, exclude perl-NetAddr-IP from
RepoForge .repo file
? exclude=perl-NetAddr-IP to appropriate repo, and yum will not bother
you about this again.

? Thank you for that.? Very helpful.
? But I do hope Dag is out there somewhere too...

This should be fixed, if it is not, let me know.

I can verify that yum no longer complains that I need to upgrade
perl-NetAddr-IP, thus it has definitely been moved.? Thank you!

[email builder]

Post by Dag Wieers

? ?? But why is perl-NetAddr-IP in your base repo?? Your FAQ
? ?? Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with
? ? upstream packages
? ?? into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who
?? want to be
? ?? confident that our packages will not cause conflicts
?? with upstream can
? ?? enable the base repository, and users who want newer
?? versions of
? ?? packages (and are willing to tolerate some package
?? conflicts) can enable
? ? ? the extras repository.

? Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue.
?? It is caused
? by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the
?? last 5.x
? http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
? http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/

? You can always, as an temporary solution, exclude perl-NetAddr-IP from
RepoForge .repo file
? exclude=perl-NetAddr-IP to appropriate repo, and yum will not bother
you about this again.

? Thank you for that.? Very helpful.
? But I do hope Dag is out there somewhere too...

This should be fixed, if it is not, let me know.

I can verify that yum no longer complains that I need to upgrade
perl-NetAddr-IP, thus it has definitely been moved.? Thank you!

[Dag Wieers]

Post by email builder

Post by Ljubomir Ljubojevic

Post by David Hrbáč

? Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream
packages
? into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to
be
? confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with
upstream can
? enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
? packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can
enable
? ? the extras repository.

Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue. It is caused
by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the last 5.x
http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/

You can always, as an temporary solution, exclude perl-NetAddr-IP from
RepoForge .repo file
exclude=perl-NetAddr-IP to appropriate repo, and yum will not bother you
about this again.

Thank you for that.? Very helpful.
But I do hope Dag is out there somewhere too...

This should be fixed, if it is not, let me know.

We moved to a new location and I was without internet until last week. I
have rebuild everything in the queue and fixed the remaining issues that
related to removing packages. I still need to go over other issues,
especially those blocked by me...

[email builder]

Post by Ljubomir Ljubojevic

Post by David Hrbáč

? Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream
packages
? into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to
be
? confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with
upstream can
? enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
? packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can
enable
? ? the extras repository.

Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue. It is caused
by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the last 5.x
http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/

You can always, as an temporary solution, exclude perl-NetAddr-IP from
RepoForge .repo file
exclude=perl-NetAddr-IP to appropriate repo, and yum will not bother you
about this again.

Thank you for that.? Very helpful.

But I do hope Dag is out there somewhere too...

[David Hrbáč]

OK, I've followed your advice. I hope I did it in the right place -
https://github.com/repoforge/repoforge.github.com/issues/2 Thank you
for your hard work.

Thanks. Well, better place is https://github.com/repoforge/rpms. I
guess there's no way for me to move the ticket to another repo... I can
file a new one for you, but it'd be attached to my account. I guess it
should be attached to yours.
DH

[email builder]

Post by email builder
OK, I've followed your advice.? I hope I did it in the right place -
https://github.com/repoforge/repoforge.github.com/issues/2 Thank you
for your hard work.

Thanks. Well, better place is https://github.com/repoforge/rpms.? I
guess there's no way for me to move the ticket to another repo... I can
file a new one for you, but it'd be attached to my account. I guess it
should be attached to yours.

Sorry about that.? Github confuses me.? Here it is the new one:

https://github.com/repoforge/rpms/issues/96

[email builder]

Post by email builder
OK, I've followed your advice.? I hope I did it in the right place -
https://github.com/repoforge/repoforge.github.com/issues/2 Thank you
for your hard work.

Thanks. Well, better place is https://github.com/repoforge/rpms.? I
guess there's no way for me to move the ticket to another repo... I can
file a new one for you, but it'd be attached to my account. I guess it
should be attached to yours.

Sorry about that.? Github confuses me.? Here it is the new one:

https://github.com/repoforge/rpms/issues/96

[Ljubomir Ljubojevic]

Post by David Hrbáč

Post by email builder
Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream packages
into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to be
confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with upstream can
enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can enable
the extras repository.

Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue. It is caused
by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the last 5.x
http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/

You can always, as an temporary solution, exclude perl-NetAddr-IP from
RepoForge .repo file

Just add:

exclude=perl-NetAddr-IP to appropriate repo, and yum will not bother you
about this again.

[David Hrbáč]

OK, I've followed your advice. I hope I did it in the right place -
https://github.com/repoforge/repoforge.github.com/issues/2 Thank you
for your hard work.

Thanks. Well, better place is https://github.com/repoforge/rpms. I
guess there's no way for me to move the ticket to another repo... I can
file a new one for you, but it'd be attached to my account. I guess it
should be attached to yours.
DH

[email builder]

Post by David Hrbáč

Post by email builder
Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream packages
into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to be
confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with upstream can
enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can enable
? the extras repository.

Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue. It is caused
by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the last 5.x
http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/

Ah, I see.

Post by David Hrbáč
Yes, there are packages which have to be in RFX, have wrong version and
other issues. This is something I personally am not able to solve and
sort out. There's no one to move or remove packages but Dag. I can only
commit new spec file versions. I can't even build those new ones. So
because of that, not only that, I have to manage my own repos. :o( On
the other hand, there's something you can do about. Create the ticket on
GitHub.

OK, I've followed your advice.? I hope I did it in the right place - there
aren't really any other issues here:

https://github.com/repoforge/repoforge.github.com/issues/2

Thank you for your hard work.

[David Hrbáč]

Post by email builder
Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream packages
into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to be
confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with upstream can
enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can enable
the extras repository.

Well, I'm also not happy about it and I find it an issue. It is caused
by historical reasons. RedHat included this package during the last 5.x
release. Compare:
http://vault.centos.org/5.6/os/i386/CentOS/
http://merlin.fit.vutbr.cz/mirrors/centos/5.7/os/i386/CentOS/
Yes, there are packages which have to be in RFX, have wrong version and
other issues. This is something I personally am not able to solve and
sort out. There's no one to move or remove packages but Dag. I can only
commit new spec file versions. I can't even build those new ones. So
because of that, not only that, I have to manage my own repos. :o( On
the other hand, there's something you can do about. Create the ticket on
GitHub.
DH

[email builder]

Post by David Hrbáč

Post by email builder
Sure, yes.? As you see above, I have spamassassin installed from
CentOS repo as well as others.? My problem was fixed by not using the
RepoForge version of perl-NetAddr-IP any more. To me it would seem
common that many people pick up packages from RepoForge that they
can't get from CenOS or need for some other reason.? And it seems
logical that the packages should work together as best possible.? I
realize version problems may be hard to overcome in all cases, but I
guess I thought a subroutine being defined in a place that it
shouldn't might be something to fix in your repo.

As my reply to centos list. These packages are within RF email stack
solution. So we want users to have them all from RF, not just particular
ones.

But why is perl-NetAddr-IP in your base repo?? Your FAQ says:

Our goal is to move all packages that conflict with upstream packages
into a separate ?extras? repository; this way, users who want to be
confident that our packages will not cause conflicts with upstream can
enable the base repository, and users who want newer versions of
packages (and are willing to tolerate some package conflicts) can enable
the extras repository.

[David Hrbáč]

Sure, yes. As you see above, I have spamassassin installed from
CentOS repo as well as others. My problem was fixed by not using the
RepoForge version of perl-NetAddr-IP any more. To me it would seem
common that many people pick up packages from RepoForge that they
can't get from CenOS or need for some other reason. And it seems
logical that the packages should work together as best possible. I
realize version problems may be hard to overcome in all cases, but I
guess I thought a subroutine being defined in a place that it
shouldn't might be something to fix in your repo.

As my reply to centos list. These packages are within RF email stack
solution. So we want users to have them all from RF, not just particular
ones.
DH

[Ned Slider]

Post by email builder

Post by email builder
Hello,
Lately I've been seeing this every day caused by sa-update (spamassassin
Subroutine Net::DNS::Resolver::Base::AF_INET6 redefined at
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm line 65.
at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/Net/DNS/Resolver/Base.pm
line 65I searched Google and saw that this issue was supposedly from 2008 and was
fixed. The only helpful thing I found was a couple people recommending to
remove perl-IO-Socket-INET6. I wanted to avoid the hassle of yum complaining
because I removed a package that is a dependency of others, so I asked for
help on the spamassassin and CentOS mailing lists. In the end, the CentOS
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.centos.general/121797
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.51-2.fc6
perl-Net-DNS-0.63-1.el5.rfspamassassin-3.3.1-2.el5
I was encouraged to try not to mix rpms from different repos, so
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5
Still no luck, and eventually it was suggested that
perl-NetAddr-IP might be the cause. After changing
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.027-5.el5_6
So it appears that perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf might have
a redundant function definition (AF_INET6) in it.
HTH and thank you for your service!!

Hello,
Seems to me that you are still using the mix of repos. Packages from RF
work fine.
root at specs2:1280:279:/$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6
perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP| sort
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.57-2.el5.rfx
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf
perl-Net-DNS-0.66-1.el5.rfx
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx

Indeed, and even some combinations work fine if you're not using IPv6:

$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6 perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP
package perl-IO-Socket-INET6 is not installed
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf.x86_64
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5.x86_64
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx.x86_64


PS - perl-Net-DNS latest upstream version is currently 0.67.

[email builder]

Post by email builder

Post by email builder
Lately I've been seeing this every day caused by sa-update
(spamassassin
Subroutine Net::DNS::Resolver::Base::AF_INET6 redefined at
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm line 65.
? at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/Net/DNS/Resolver/Base.pm
line 65I searched Google and saw that this issue was supposedly from 2008 and was
fixed.? The only helpful thing I found was a couple people recommending to
remove perl-IO-Socket-INET6.? I wanted to avoid the hassle of yum

complaining

Post by email builder
because I removed a package that is a dependency of others, so I asked for
help on the spamassassin and CentOS mailing lists.? In the end, the CentOS
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.centos.general/121797
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.51-2.fc6
perl-Net-DNS-0.63-1.el5.rf
spamassassin-3.3.1-2.el5
I was encouraged to try not to mix rpms from different repos, so
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5
Still no luck, and eventually it was suggested that
perl-NetAddr-IP might be the cause.? After changing
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.027-5.el5_6
So it appears that perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf might have
a redundant function definition (AF_INET6) in it.

Seems to me that you are still using the mix of repos. Packages from RF
work fine.

Sure, yes.? As you see above, I have spamassassin installed from CentOS
repo as well as others.? My problem was fixed by not using the RepoForge
version of perl-NetAddr-IP any more.

To me it would seem common that many people
pick up packages from RepoForge that they can't get from CenOS or need
for some other reason.? And it seems logical that the packages should
work together as best possible.? I realize version problems may be hard to
overcome in all cases, but I guess I thought a subroutine being defined in
a place that it shouldn't might be something to fix in your repo.

Post by email builder
root at specs2:1280:279:/$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6
perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP| sort
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.57-2.el5.rfx
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf
perl-Net-DNS-0.66-1.el5.rfx
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx

[email builder]

Hello,

Lately I've been seeing this every day caused by sa-update (spamassassin
updater) run from cron:

Subroutine Net::DNS::Resolver::Base::AF_INET6 redefined at
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm line 65.
?at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/Net/DNS/Resolver/Base.pm
line 65I searched Google and saw that this issue was supposedly from 2008 and was
fixed.? The only helpful thing I found was a couple people recommending to
remove perl-IO-Socket-INET6.? I wanted to avoid the hassle of yum complaining
because I removed a package that is a dependency of others, so I asked for
help on the spamassassin and CentOS mailing lists.? In the end, the CentOS
list members seemed to help me find the cause:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.centos.general/121797

I had these (the seemingly relevant packages):

perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.51-2.fc6

perl-Net-DNS-0.63-1.el5.rfspamassassin-3.3.1-2.el5

I was encouraged to try not to mix rpms from different repos, so
I changed to the CentOS repo for perl-Net-DNS:

perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5

Still no luck, and eventually it was suggested that
perl-NetAddr-IP might be the cause.? After changing
it to CentOS repo, the bug has gone away:

perl-NetAddr-IP-4.027-5.el5_6

So it appears that perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf might have
a redundant function definition (AF_INET6) in it.

HTH and thank you for your service!!

[David Hrbáč]

Post by email builder
Hello,
Lately I've been seeing this every day caused by sa-update (spamassassin
Subroutine Net::DNS::Resolver::Base::AF_INET6 redefined at
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/Exporter.pm line 65.
at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/Net/DNS/Resolver/Base.pm
line 65I searched Google and saw that this issue was supposedly from 2008 and was
fixed. The only helpful thing I found was a couple people recommending to
remove perl-IO-Socket-INET6. I wanted to avoid the hassle of yum complaining
because I removed a package that is a dependency of others, so I asked for
help on the spamassassin and CentOS mailing lists. In the end, the CentOS
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.centos.general/121797
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.51-2.fc6
perl-Net-DNS-0.63-1.el5.rfspamassassin-3.3.1-2.el5
I was encouraged to try not to mix rpms from different repos, so
perl-Net-DNS-0.59-3.el5
Still no luck, and eventually it was suggested that
perl-NetAddr-IP might be the cause. After changing
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.027-5.el5_6
So it appears that perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf might have
a redundant function definition (AF_INET6) in it.
HTH and thank you for your service!!

Hello,
Seems to me that you are still using the mix of repos. Packages from RF
work fine.

root at specs2:1280:279:/$ rpm -q spamassassin perl-IO-Socket-INET6
perl-Net-DNS perl-NetAddr-IP| sort
perl-IO-Socket-INET6-2.57-2.el5.rfx
perl-NetAddr-IP-4.044-1.el5.rf
perl-Net-DNS-0.66-1.el5.rfx
spamassassin-3.3.2-2.el5.rfx

root at specs2:1279:278:/$ sa-update -D
Jan 10 15:07:53.098 [32233] dbg: logger: adding facilities: all
Jan 10 15:07:53.098 [32233] dbg: logger: logging level is DBG
Jan 10 15:07:53.098 [32233] dbg: generic: SpamAssassin version 3.3.2
Jan 10 15:07:53.098 [32233] dbg: generic: Perl 5.008008, PREFIX=/usr,
DEF_RULES_DIR=/usr/share/spamassassin,
LOCAL_RULES_DIR=/etc/mail/spamassassin,
LOCAL_STATE_DIR=/var/lib/spamassassin
Jan 10 15:07:53.098 [32233] dbg: config: timing enabled
Jan 10 15:07:53.099 [32233] dbg: config: score set 0 chosen.
Jan 10 15:07:53.104 [32233] dbg: dns: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
Jan 10 15:07:53.104 [32233] dbg: dns: Net::DNS version: 0.66
Jan 10 15:07:53.104 [32233] dbg: generic: sa-update version svn917659
Jan 10 15:07:53.104 [32233] dbg: generic: using update directory:
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.003002
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: perl platform: 5.008008 linux
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Digest::SHA1, version 2.13
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
HTML::Parser, version 3.68
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed: Net::DNS,
version 0.66
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
NetAddr::IP, version 4.044
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Time::HiRes, version 1.9717
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Archive::Tar, version 1.56
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed: IO::Zlib,
version 1.10
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Digest::SHA1, version 2.13
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
MIME::Base64, version 3.07
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed: DB_File,
version 1.814
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Net::SMTP, version 2.29
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Mail::SPF, version v2.006
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
IP::Country::Fast, version 604.001
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Razor2::Client::Agent, version 2.84
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Net::Ident, version 1.23
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
IO::Socket::INET6, version 2.57
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
IO::Socket::SSL, version 1.44
Jan 10 15:07:53.231 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Compress::Zlib, version 2.037
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Mail::DKIM, version 0.39
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed: DBI,
version 1.616
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Getopt::Long, version 2.35
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
LWP::UserAgent, version 5.835
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
HTTP::Date, version 5.831
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: diag: [...] module installed:
Encode::Detect, version 1.01
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: gpg: Searching for 'gpg'
Jan 10 15:07:53.232 [32233] dbg: util: current PATH is:
/usr/kerberos/sbin:/usr/kerberos/bin:/usr/lib64/ccache/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin
Jan 10 15:07:53.233 [32233] dbg: util: executable for gpg was found at
/usr/bin/gpg
Jan 10 15:07:53.233 [32233] dbg: gpg: found /usr/bin/gpg
Jan 10 15:07:53.233 [32233] dbg: gpg: release trusted key id list:
5E541DC959CB8BAC7C78DFDC4056A61A5244EC45
26C900A46DD40CD5AD24F6D7DEE01987265FA05B
0C2B1D7175B852C64B3CDC716C55397824F434CE
Jan 10 15:07:53.235 [32233] dbg: channel: attempting channel
updates.spamassassin.org
Jan 10 15:07:53.235 [32233] dbg: channel: update directory
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.003002/updates_spamassassin_org
Jan 10 15:07:53.235 [32233] dbg: channel: channel cf file
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.003002/updates_spamassassin_org.cf
Jan 10 15:07:53.236 [32233] dbg: channel: channel pre file
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.003002/updates_spamassassin_org.pre
Jan 10 15:07:53.236 [32233] dbg: channel: metadata version = 1227079
Jan 10 15:07:53.240 [32233] dbg: dns: 2.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org =>
1227079, parsed as 1227079
Jan 10 15:07:53.240 [32233] dbg: channel: current version is 1227079,
new version is 1227079, skipping channel
Jan 10 15:07:53.240 [32233] dbg: diag: updates complete, exiting with code 1

Regards,
DH