/usr/lib/debug ownership

[Panu Matilainen]

On 02/16/2013 01:33 PM, Alec Leamas wrote:
> On 02/16/2013 11:41 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>> On 02/16/2013 11:44 AM, Alec Leamas wrote:
>>> On 02/15/2013 11:58 PM, Till Maas wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 10:50:28AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> - make a script to identify all the packages that are broken and
>>>>>    shipping debug stuff.
>>>> AT least for the directory a simple yum call should suffice:
>>>> yum --disablerepo '*' --enablerepo fedora\*  whatprovides
>>>> /usr/lib/debug
>>>>
>>>> But it shows that a lot (all?) debuginfo packages own the directory
>>>> which probably needs to be fixed in rpm itself.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Till
>>> I have filed a bug against filesystem: BZ 911831.
>>>
>>> I get 46 owners of /usr/lib/debug, that can't be all debug packages...
>>>
>>> Shall we file a bug against rpm, saying that claiming the complete path
>>> doesn't really work? I see the problems here, if rpm shouldn't claim the
>>> complete path /usr/lib/debug/lib/whatever, the part to claim is more or
>>> less arbitrary.
>>
>>
>> Multiple owned directories might not be "packaging purist clean" :)
>> but since -debuginfo packages are auto-generated and thus kinda
>> guaranteed to be non-conflicting, it's just the less ugly option when
>> the alternative is leaving empty directories behind. Which is what
>> would happen if -debuginfo packages didn't own *all* the directories
>> they put files into.
>>
>>     - Panu -
>>
>>
> Well, I try to be practical (believe it or not). This explanation looks
> perfectly sound to me (although  it still seems inconsistent that
> filesystem owns /usr/src/debug but not /usr/lib/debug).

Ah, didn't know filesystem owns some of the toplevel debug directories. 
Not particularly harmful but consistency rarely hurts.

>
> I ran into this while automating some tests about directory ownership in
> fedora-review. If we all agree that Panu's position is OK, I would be
> more than happy to just exclude /usr/l{lib,src}/debug from the ownership
> checks. With that we should be able to close this discussion.
>
> However,  at least Kevin had other ideas. So did I, but I'm flexible and
> have changed my mind  :)

I think Kevin was talking about "normal", ie non-debuginfo packages like 
the example case of nacl-devel owning /usr/lib/debug, which indeed is a 
(trivial) packaging bug. Except perhaps for the filesystem package which 
is fairly special case anyway.

OTOH because -debuginfo packages always own all the relevant directories 
there's no need for filesystem to own them, which would allow for a nice 
and clean rule: any non-debuginfo package owning the *debug directories 
can be considered an unnecessary multiple directory ownership (and a bug 
of sorts).

	- Panu -