On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Colin Guthrie <[email protected]> wrote: > 'Twas brillig, and David Walser at 15/06/12 01:42 did gyre and gimble: >> So, maybe we should do something about this. My preference would >> have rpm still complain about unpackaged %excluded files, but not >> die, just give a warning instead. > > Personally, I don't see the point in using %exclude to exclude files > completely from all sub packages. We can just use "rm" in the the > %install section for that (we typically already do that to remove *.la > files for example). > > So for me %exclude should only operate on subpackage file list and > should only be useful to undo any wildcard inclusions: > > e.g. > %files > %{_libdir}/foo/* > %exclude %{_libdir}/foo/something-in-another-sub-package > > %files -n sub > %{_libdir}/foo/something-in-another-sub-package > > > That kind of thing. > > That, to me, seems most logical. I'm not sure what the upstream > behaviour is, but I would agree that we should follow it all the same > even if the goal would be to push for upstream changes when needed. > > Cheers > > Col
Hi, see with upstream. We won't change the behaviour of rpm for this "only in mageia" and be inconsistent with fedora/opensuse/... cheers
