@petere After testing the patch, it seems like it's fine to me. I'm okay with
it entering as-is. :+1:
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/60#issuecomment-186955079___
Rpm-maint
@Conan-Kudo The current implementation uses relative symlinks. The Fedora
packaging guidelines don't have a strong opinion on what kind of symlink should
be used, but I was trying to preserve the existing kind. (Debian policy would
call for a relative symlink here, FWIW.)
---
Reply to this
@ffesti That would certainly make things simpler.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/60#issuecomment-186496903___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
@ffesti What I was suggesting is that perhaps the following might solve the
problem better:
```
@rm -f $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmquery
@LN_S@ -f $(rpmbindir)/rpm $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmquery
@rm -f $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmverify
@LN_S@ -f $(rpmbindir)/rpm $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmverify
May be I should have been more clear:
What about
@rm -f $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmquery
@LN_S@ rpm $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmquery
@rm -f $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmverify
@LN_S@ rpm $(DESTDIR)$(rpmbindir)/rpmverify
?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
@ffesti The actual problem is that `/bin/rpm` isn't valid when you install to
`/usr/local`, and the symlinks unconditionally assume rpm is being installed
systemwide.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
I wonder if the easier way to fix this is to actually move the two symlinks to
the same directory as the rpm binary...
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
rpmquery and rpmverify are symlinks to rpm. The former are usually
installed in /usr/bin, the latter in /bin, so the symlink points to
../../bin/rpm. But for installations into other prefixes, the synlimk
should just point to the same directory.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull
