Petr Menšík wrote:
> No, that is the reason why I proposed it. Guidelines already state
> *-filesystem packages does not have to be depended on [1]. Just one,
> probably systemd or systemd-libs, should depend on it to get it
> installed. All other can then just ignore the directory exactly as you
> have proposed. In this case it would not be breaking guidelines, but
> according to them instead.
> 
> 1.
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_file_and_directory_ownership

That is contradicted by the following quote from the Packaging
Guidelines:

| Sometimes, it may be preferable for such directories to be owned by
| an "artificial filesystem" package, such as mozilla-filesystem. These
| packages are designed to be explicitly required when other packages
| store files in their directories, thus, in such situations, these
| packages should explicitly Require the artificial filesystem package
| and not multiply own those directories.

That is, each of those 1600 packages would need to require
systemd-filesystem.

Perhaps the filesystem package should own these directories? Not
systemd-filesystem, just filesystem. The case is rather similar to
/usr/share/bash-completion, /usr/share/man, /usr/share/info and various
other directories that filesystem owns.

Björn Persson

Attachment: pgpM1c3jmu0yS.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Reply via email to