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 02-15-2008, 05:07 AM
Jason L Tibbitts III
 
Default Duplication of documentation in subpackages

I've seen a few packages which include things like a readme or license
file in both the main package and one or more subpackages.

The review guidelines are explicit that packages must not contain
duplicate files in the %files listing, and generally these will abort
a build, but in the case of %doc files this doesn't seem to be the
case.

I know spot has indicated in the past that there's no legal
requirement to duplicate the license file between subpackages, even
when they have names which don't relate them in any way to the main
package. What I've never been sure of is whether it's something I
need to block packages for. I guess if anyone is that concerned about
saving space they can just do --nodocs installs.

- J<

--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
 
Old 02-15-2008, 08:18 AM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default Duplication of documentation in subpackages

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:07:48AM -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> I've seen a few packages which include things like a readme or license
> file in both the main package and one or more subpackages.
>
> The review guidelines are explicit that packages must not contain
> duplicate files in the %files listing, and generally these will abort
> a build, but in the case of %doc files this doesn't seem to be the
> case.

That's because they are not installed at the smae location since the
package name is used when constructing the doc directory.

> I know spot has indicated in the past that there's no legal
> requirement to duplicate the license file between subpackages, even
> when they have names which don't relate them in any way to the main
> package. What I've never been sure of is whether it's something I
> need to block packages for. I guess if anyone is that concerned about
> saving space they can just do --nodocs installs.

I personnally think that it can be left to the packager, but it also
seems to me that we should discourage it in packages that depend on other
packages that have the same doc files.

But, in my opinion, in packages that don't depend on each other,
duplicating at least the license makes sense (though should not be
mandatory).

--
Pat

--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
 
Old 02-15-2008, 10:28 PM
"Tom "spot" Callaway"
 
Default Duplication of documentation in subpackages

On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 10:18 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> But, in my opinion, in packages that don't depend on each other,
> duplicating at least the license makes sense (though should not be
> mandatory).

I've got no problem with this approach, although, I don't necessarily
want to encourage it, as it could get absurd in packages with a lot of
subpackages.

~spot

--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
 
Old 02-15-2008, 10:34 PM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default Duplication of documentation in subpackages

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 06:28:46PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 10:18 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > But, in my opinion, in packages that don't depend on each other,
> > duplicating at least the license makes sense (though should not be
> > mandatory).
>
> I've got no problem with this approach, although, I don't necessarily
> want to encourage it, as it could get absurd in packages with a lot of
> subpackages.

Indeed. I have no problem with it being discouraged, as long as it is
not forbidden (by the guidelines).

--
Pat

--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
 
Old 02-16-2008, 03:10 PM
"Debarshi Ray"
 
Default Duplication of documentation in subpackages

In packages with queer licensing (eg., multiple licensing scenarios) I
duplicate the license(s) if they are relevant to the sub-packages as
well. eg., in glade3, glade3-libgladeui and glade3-libgladeui-devel.
Is this alright?

Cheers,
Debarshi
--
"From what we get, we can make a living; what we give, however, makes a life."
-- Arthur Ashe

--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
 
Old 02-16-2008, 04:55 PM
Jason L Tibbitts III
 
Default Duplication of documentation in subpackages

>>>>> "DR" == Debarshi Ray <debarshi.ray@gmail.com> writes:

DR> In packages with queer licensing (eg., multiple licensing
DR> scenarios) I duplicate the license(s) if they are relevant to the
DR> sub-packages as well. eg., in glade3, glade3-libgladeui and
DR> glade3-libgladeui-devel. Is this alright?

It's not necessary, but I don't see any problem with it. There was
just some discussion about this on this list a couple of days ago.

- J<

--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:57 AM.

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