Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

Control: severity -1 serious Control: notfound -1 9-2 Control: found -1 10.1-3 I couldn't get this to work using a postrm script (the script appeared to run at the wrong time), so maybe we need a trigger after all. Thanks, Jeremy Bicha

Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

Control: severity -1 important I temporarily reverted this change so that we could get the new chrome-gnome-shell in to testing. Therefore, I also need to temporarily make this bug not RC for it to migrate this week. Thanks, Jeremy Bicha

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 11:35:50PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 08:59:39PM +, Holger Levsen wrote: > > a.) using /opt/etc and shipping files there is fine today and piuparts > > should not complain here > Could you briefly explain in which way the most recent FHS

Bug#888546: Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:01:07AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > Holger, this one (#888546) is the bug that you reported. If you think > it is really a bug in piuparts, feel free to reassign again. well, this bug is about a file/directory vanishing and I think it is correct that piuparts

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 05:15:48PM -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 4:40 PM Santiago Vila wrote: > > What I said is that no sane package in Debian/main should need to put > > files directly in /etc/opt. That's an oddity, a very unorthodox thing, > > it would be like a Debian

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

Jonathan Nieder writes: > Jeremy Bicha wrote: >> chrome-gnome-shell (in this case) is an addon for the Google Chrome web >> browser. Since Chrome installs to /opt/ (which is encouraged by FHS), >> /etc/opt/ is the only standards-compliant location for >> chrome-gnome-shell to ship the

Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 6:18 PM Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Then I'm confused. Why are browsers in main unable to support a > location other than /etc/opt for this? Because the app in /opt/ is not allowed by the FHS to store its configuration anywhere other /etc/opt/ . > Could there be a package

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 at 14:57:47 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Jeremy Bicha wrote: > > There is no reason this functionality cannot be offered in Debian. We > > got complaints when we supported other browsers but not Google Chrome. > > Since Google Chrome is not part of Debian, shouldn't this >

Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

Jeremy Bicha wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 5:57 PM Jonathan Nieder wrote: >>> There is no reason this functionality cannot be offered in Debian. We >>> got complaints when we supported other browsers but not Google Chrome. >> >> Since Google Chrome is not part of Debian, shouldn't this >>

Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

Dropping the other CC's for courtesy. On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 5:57 PM Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > There is no reason this functionality cannot be offered in Debian. We > > got complaints when we supported other browsers but not Google Chrome. > > Since Google Chrome is not part of Debian,

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

unmerge 888546 reassign 888546 chrome-gnome-shell thanks With this unmerge and reassign, I'm keeping each bug where they were originally reported. Holger, this one (#888546) is the bug that you reported. If you think it is really a bug in piuparts, feel free to reassign again. [ After this I

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

Hi, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 4:40 PM Santiago Vila wrote: >> What I said is that no sane package in Debian/main should need to put >> files directly in /etc/opt. That's an oddity, a very unorthodox thing, >> it would be like a Debian package in main putting stuff directly

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 08:59:39PM +, Holger Levsen wrote: > a.) using /opt/etc and shipping files there is fine today and piuparts > should not complain here Could you briefly explain in which way the most recent FHS is more permissive than previous releases? If we allow using /etc/opt

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 05:15:48PM -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 4:40 PM Santiago Vila wrote: > > What I said is that no sane package in Debian/main should need to put > > files directly in /etc/opt. That's an oddity, a very unorthodox thing, > > it would be like a Debian

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 4:40 PM Santiago Vila wrote: > What I said is that no sane package in Debian/main should need to put > files directly in /etc/opt. That's an oddity, a very unorthodox thing, > it would be like a Debian package in main putting stuff directly in /opt. chrome-gnome-shell (in

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 10:47:16PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 08:41:49PM +, Holger Levsen wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 10:28:18PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > > > > Can we reassing this already, please? > > > > for those watching along: > > - #93390 is

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 08:41:49PM +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 10:28:18PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > > Can we reassing this already, please? > > for those watching along: > - #93390 is closed. > - #888549 is assigned to chrome-gnome-shell I was referring to #888243,

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 10:28:18PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 01:23:32PM -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > > > References > > > > [...] > > - https://bugs.debian.org/93390 > > Are you serious? [...] > Can we reassing this already, please? for those

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 01:38:19PM -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 1:31 PM Santiago Vila wrote: > > Please reassign. This is not a bug in base-files. > > Let's specifically talk about https://bugs.debian.org/888549 . You > opened that bug claiming that chrome-gnome-shell

Bug#888549: Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 01:23:32PM -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > References > > [...] > - https://bugs.debian.org/93390 Are you serious? Such bug was in 2001-04-10, but in 2001-11-09 I modified base-files to provide the opt directories, this is from the changelog: base-files

Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 1:31 PM Santiago Vila wrote: > Please reassign. This is not a bug in base-files. Let's specifically talk about https://bugs.debian.org/888549 . You opened that bug claiming that chrome-gnome-shell wasn't compliant with FHS but it is compliant. > We pass the FHS

Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 01:23:32PM -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > Santiago, can we revisit this? > > Debian Policy § 9.1.1 since 4.1.5.0 requires compliance with FHS 3.0 > and I don't see any listed exception for /etc/opt/ . > > FHS 3.0 § 3.7.2 requires /etc/opt/ . (§ 3.2 also requires /opt) We

Bug#888243: Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

Santiago, can we revisit this? Debian Policy § 9.1.1 since 4.1.5.0 requires compliance with FHS 3.0 and I don't see any listed exception for /etc/opt/ . FHS 3.0 § 3.7.2 requires /etc/opt/ . (§ 3.2 also requires /opt) References -

Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 12:15:38AM +, Simon McVittie wrote: > On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 at 00:46:27 +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > > It has come to my attention (via Bug #888243) than this package uses > > /etc/opt. > > > > The opt directories exist for "add-on" packages, i.e. those who are > > not

Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 at 00:46:27 +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > It has come to my attention (via Bug #888243) than this package uses /etc/opt. > > The opt directories exist for "add-on" packages, i.e. those who are > not provided by Debian. chrome-gnome-shell uses /etc/opt to get itself loaded by

Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Santiago Vila wrote: > It has come to my attention (via Bug #888243) than this package uses /etc/opt. > > The opt directories exist for "add-on" packages, i.e. those who are > not provided by Debian. > > Well-behaved FHS-compliant packages should

Bug#888549: chrome-gnome-shell: Please don't use /etc/opt, it's not FHS-compliant

Package: chrome-gnome-shell Version: 9-2 Dear maintainers: It has come to my attention (via Bug #888243) than this package uses /etc/opt. The opt directories exist for "add-on" packages, i.e. those who are not provided by Debian. Well-behaved FHS-compliant packages should not use any of the