Dne 12.4.2011 16:57, Michael Calmer napsal(a):
Ahh, different philosophies apply here :-)
Aha. Our "philosophy" is here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership
So let me explain.
OBS does not build this RPM, because during build, every directory is checked
if it is owned by some package. rhn-client-tools is in Requires, but not
How the check is done? The package is installed with --nodeps?
1) add a BuildRequires: rhn-client-tools
Can be. But definitelly wrapped with %if suse_version since this
Requires is not needed in Fedora and RHEL (well probably not needed even
in SUSE, only in OBS)
2) add the %dir statement like above, maybe with %if suse_version around. RPM
work fine with directories owned by multiple packages.
Yes, suse wrapper is ok.
I'm against ownership by multiple packages because:
a) it is explicitly forbidden in Fedora Guidelines:
"... If your package already requires that package for other reasons,
then your package should not also own that directory."
b) I worked on several BZs in my life, where file/directory was owned by
multiple packages but some of them use %attr(X), which was incompatible
with %attr(Y) of that other package. And rpm will set attribute of that
file/directory to that one, who will be installed last... So I learned
the hard way to follow our Guidelines.
At SUSE we prefer to add the %dir statement to not accidently introduce build
cycles.
Please tell me what you would prefer. I will send a new patch later this week.
Both options are fine if you wrap it with "%if suse_version". So choose
yourself.
Mirek
_______________________________________________
Spacewalk-devel mailing list
Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
