Hi,
On Qui, 2013-07-11 at 15:30 +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Richard W.M. Jones
<rjones(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:48:56PM +0000, Petr Pisar wrote:
>> I've just spotted usr-move has been completed.
>>
<
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelin...
>> states:
>>
>> In addition, Fedora packages MUST NOT place files or directories in the
>> /bin, /sbin, /lib or /lib64 directories. Instead, the /usr/bin,
>> /usr/sbin, /usr/lib, and /usr/lib64 directories must be used.
>> Should I file bug against bash, glibc, and other packages?
Or should
>> there be a list of exceptions?
>
> .. and no, we don't need a list of exceptions.
>
> Keep it consistent with upstream / common sense / distros that
> didn't make the usrmove mistake.
I don't think was a mistake , IMO to be a mistake, I need a prove that
we need /bin and /usr/bin directories as independent directories and
have some binaries in one and others in other .
While I agree with calling this a mistake, just ignoring rules that
one doesn't like will not allow us to build even a barely consistent
distribution. Filing bugs would be quite appropriate.
That said, I'd love Fedora to be significantly consistent in
more
important matters than paths in a spec file that have exactly zero
effect on users in the best case[1].
Mirek
[1] Note that just moving the files may not be good enough - the
package may need to add an explicit Provides:/non-usr-path and keep it
for an indefinite time.
IHMO , I think guideline overstate MUST NOT place files in /bin etc ,
this is applicable on scriptlets of the spec , but not in upstream code,
if upstream code use /bin, don't worry about that, because with /bin
symbol link to /usr/bin, all will be saved in /usr/bin .
My opinion .
--
Sérgio M. B.