FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Packaging

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-16-2010, 03:36 PM
Rex Dieter
 
Default ownership of /usr/share/gtk-doc

See tracking bug,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604169

Seems an enterprising soul mass-filed bugs arguing packages placing content
under /usr/share/gtk-doc doesn't necessarily need to
Requires: gtk-doc

that leaves the question of what should own/provide /usr/share/gtk-doc

To start the bikeshedding, let me offer my own personal-preference orderred
list:
1. gnome-filesytstem (comment #20)
2. add to 'filesystem' itself
3. gtk-doc-filesystem
...
83. make each consumer of /usr/share/gtk-doc own it

and please suggest other alternatives, if none of these are appealing to
you.

-- Rex

--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 06-16-2010, 03:37 PM
"Jason L Tibbitts III"
 
Default ownership of /usr/share/gtk-doc

>>>>> "RD" == Rex Dieter <rdieter@math.unl.edu> writes:

RD> See tracking bug, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604169
RD> Seems an enterprising soul mass-filed bugs arguing packages placing
RD> content under /usr/share/gtk-doc doesn't necessarily need to
RD> Requires: gtk-doc

Do the guidelines not already cover this case?

"Multiple packages own files in a common directory but none of them
needs to require the others."

All of the packages should simply own /usr/share/gtk-doc.

- J<
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 06-16-2010, 04:10 PM
Matthias Clasen
 
Default ownership of /usr/share/gtk-doc

On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 10:36 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> See tracking bug,
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604169
>
> Seems an enterprising soul mass-filed bugs arguing packages placing content
> under /usr/share/gtk-doc doesn't necessarily need to
> Requires: gtk-doc
>
> that leaves the question of what should own/provide /usr/share/gtk-doc
>
> To start the bikeshedding, let me offer my own personal-preference orderred
> list:
> 1. gnome-filesytstem (comment #20)
> 2. add to 'filesystem' itself
> 3. gtk-doc-filesystem
> ...
> 83. make each consumer of /usr/share/gtk-doc own it
>
> and please suggest other alternatives, if none of these are appealing to
> you.
>

How about making rpm's directory handling sane ?

--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 06-16-2010, 04:15 PM
seth vidal
 
Default ownership of /usr/share/gtk-doc

On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 12:10 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> >
> > and please suggest other alternatives, if none of these are appealing to
> > you.
> >
>
> How about making rpm's directory handling sane ?

not commenting on whether or not rpm's directory handling is 'sane' but
rpm-maint mailing list is at rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org

and that's where discussion of changing things within rpm should
probably go on.

-sv




--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 06-16-2010, 04:44 PM
Mamoru Tasaka
 
Default ownership of /usr/share/gtk-doc

Jason L Tibbitts III wrote, at 06/17/2010 12:37 AM +9:00:
>>>>>> "RD" == Rex Dieter<rdieter@math.unl.edu> writes:
>
> RD> See tracking bug, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604169
> RD> Seems an enterprising soul mass-filed bugs arguing packages placing
> RD> content under /usr/share/gtk-doc doesn't necessarily need to
> RD> Requires: gtk-doc
>
> Do the guidelines not already cover this case?
>
> "Multiple packages own files in a common directory but none of them
> needs to require the others."
>
> All of the packages should simply own /usr/share/gtk-doc.

On rawhide

# repoquery --whatprovides '/usr/share/gtk-doc/html/*' | sort | cat -n

currently returns *206 packages* and making all of them own
/usr/share/gtk-doc/html must clearly regarded as a bug in the packaging
in the distibution ( I will surely complain ) and need fixing.

As /usr/share/gtk-doc/html is so common, only one filesystem-like package
must own this and all of the rest must have the dependency for it.

For Rex's idea:
> 1. gnome-filesytstem (comment #20)
> 2. add to 'filesystem' itself
> 3. gtk-doc-filesystem

Here I don't think 2 is acceptable because (it seems) that directories or files
under /usr/share/gtk-doc (and itself) are for development purpose only
and for "normal" users these directories are not needed. The directories
in filesystem should generally be for ones "every" user need them.
And with the same reason, I don't think 1 is a option.

For from me +0.5 (not +1) for idea 3 .... and I see little value in creating
gtk-doc-filesystem only for purpose, because anyway packages in need of
/usr/share/gtk-doc/ all seem for development purpose only and gtk-doc
package is "not so large".

So just make all these packages have "R: gtk-doc" seems the simplest solution.

Regards,
Mamoru
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 06-16-2010, 05:00 PM
Chen Lei
 
Default ownership of /usr/share/gtk-doc

Another option is patching gtk-doc to let it install those API
documents to /usr/share/doc/HTML. KDE packages normally install their
API documents here, /usr/share/doc/HTML is also owned by
fedora-release-notes which is core package is fedora.


Regards,
Chen Lei
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 06-16-2010, 05:11 PM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default ownership of /usr/share/gtk-doc

On 06/16/2010 06:44 PM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote, at 06/17/2010 12:37 AM +9:00:
>>>>>>> "RD" == Rex Dieter<rdieter@math.unl.edu> writes:
>>
>> RD> See tracking bug, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604169
>> RD> Seems an enterprising soul mass-filed bugs arguing packages placing
>> RD> content under /usr/share/gtk-doc doesn't necessarily need to
>> RD> Requires: gtk-doc
>>
>> Do the guidelines not already cover this case?
>>
>> "Multiple packages own files in a common directory but none of them
>> needs to require the others."
>>
>> All of the packages should simply own /usr/share/gtk-doc.
>
> On rawhide
>
> # repoquery --whatprovides '/usr/share/gtk-doc/html/*' | sort | cat -n
>
> currently returns *206 packages* and making all of them own
> /usr/share/gtk-doc/html must clearly regarded as a bug in the packaging
> in the distibution
Why? Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

> As /usr/share/gtk-doc/html is so common
No it's not "so common", it's just one directory amongst many.

Ralf

--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 06-16-2010, 06:30 PM
Rex Dieter
 
Default ownership of /usr/share/gtk-doc

Mamoru Tasaka wrote:

> So just make all these packages have "R: gtk-doc" seems the simplest
> solution.

Nice analysis. This is probably a good enough solution, closest to the
status quo (requiring little, to no changes).

I'm ok with this and/or tibbs' suggestion of allowing individual packages to
own the dir as well (those that don't have or want a dep on gtk-doc).

-- Rex

--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 06-16-2010, 07:23 PM
Chen Lei
 
Default ownership of /usr/share/gtk-doc

2010/6/17 Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp>:
> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote, at 06/17/2010 12:37 AM +9:00:
>>>>>>> "RD" == Rex Dieter<rdieter@math.unl.edu> *writes:
>>
>> RD> *See tracking bug, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604169
>> RD> *Seems an enterprising soul mass-filed bugs arguing packages placing
>> RD> *content under /usr/share/gtk-doc doesn't necessarily need to
>> RD> *Requires: gtk-doc
>>
>> Do the guidelines not already cover this case?
>>> For from me +0.5 (not +1) for idea 3 .... and I see little value in creating
> gtk-doc-filesystem only for purpose, because anyway packages in need of
> /usr/share/gtk-doc/ all seem for development purpose only and gtk-doc
> package is "not so large".
>
> So just make all these packages have "R: gtk-doc" seems the simplest solution.
>
> Regards,
> Mamoru
gtk-doc itself is quite small, but it will pull in a lot of other dependencies.

See http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=1993962
Chen Lei
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 07-18-2010, 06:46 PM
Kevin Fenzi
 
Default ownership of /usr/share/gtk-doc

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 13:30:21 -0500
Rex Dieter <rdieter@math.unl.edu> wrote:

> Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>
> > So just make all these packages have "R: gtk-doc" seems the simplest
> > solution.
>
> Nice analysis. This is probably a good enough solution, closest to
> the status quo (requiring little, to no changes).
>
> I'm ok with this and/or tibbs' suggestion of allowing individual
> packages to own the dir as well (those that don't have or want a dep
> on gtk-doc).

So, sorry to reopen this, but I have several packages with bugs on this
and would like to know what the final decision is.

Could the packaging Committee discuss this at their next meeting (or
just vote on list/in a ticket somewhere) and come up with a final
decision then update:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604169

With that decision?

Thanks,

kevin
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:26 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org