Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

--- Comment #19 from Ant Bryan <>  2009-01-12 16:48:47 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > (In reply to comment #7)
> > > As you can see these three directories are already owned by epiphany and 
> > > there
> > > should not be duplicate dir ownerships as outlined in
> > >
> > > So usually we would just own the files, not the dirs with
> > > %{_libdir}/epiphany/2.22/extensions/py*
> > 
> > I'm using Fedora 10, which has Epiphany 2.24. So I used
> > 
> > %{_libdir}/epiphany/*/extensions/gget*
> > 
> > Is that ok?
> No. It would be ok if you followed the 'no duplicate directory ownership' 
> rule,
> but in this case we cannot use it, because it will leave unowned dirs behind.
> It's better if two packages own the a dir than no package.
> So you should use
> %{_libdir}/epiphany/*/


> > > The problem is: If epiphany gets updated from 2.22 to 2.23 the three
> > > directories will become unowned. 
> > 
> > What do I need to do? Just the rebuilds you mention below?
> With the line you are using now you would need to do a rebuild a rebuild in
> time with epiphany, but _after_ it has been pushed out, because you are
> building against it. The users would have to install your update in the same
> rpm transaction as the epiphany update and in the correct order. You see: This
> is nearly impossible, that's why the 'no duplicate ownership' model doesn't
> work here.
> I have to admit that this is a very special case, but you can take it as a
> chance to learn something about packaging. ;) Maybe we can clean this up with 
> a
> symlink without version, but this would need to be done in the epiphany
> package.

Maybe I should have just disabled the epiphany-extension :)

Nah, this is interesting. 

> %{_sysconfdir}/gconf/schemas/gget.schemas should not be marked as %config
> because gconf schemas are not meant to be changed by users and need to get
> replaced on updates. No need to update your package now, wait for the review
> and then fix all issues in one release.

Ok, removed the %config there.

> Sorry I did not manage to do the review today, but I will tomorrow.

No rush!

Configure bugmail:
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Fedora-package-review mailing list

Reply via email to