9:07 p.m.
I've been trying to bundle the current ansible-5.0.1 release as an RPM
for Fedora and EPEL use. Leaving aside the peculiar decisions to
replace the pypi.org "ansible" tarball with a tarball of roughly 150
modules from the "ansiblee-collections" repos, and moving the actual
ansible software to a distinct python tarball called "ansible-core"
without changing the source repo or the actual critical installed
python modules, the new "ansible" has more than 300 files called
"README.md" and more than 100 files called "LICENSE.md".
This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the '%doc' and
'%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
install them directly at the top of the docdir.
Basicely these only generate one file:
%doc README.md
%doc dir1/README.md
%doc dir2/README.md
%license LICENSE.md
%license dir1/LICENSE
%license dir2/LICENSE.md
When compiled, these would only produce:
/usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/README.md
/usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/LICENSE.md
RHEL 7 didn't have this problem. I'm not sure if other folks have
noticed this for tools that are built with multiple internal tarballs.
The new "ansible" tarball is fairly unique ints authors insistance on
putting more than one hundred distinct third party packages in the
same master tarball. But for now, this is going to cause a license and
documentation problem in packaging it due to an "optimization" of
stripping out the directory names of document files and licenses.
Does anyone know a decent workaround, or a specfile setting to disable
this filename stripping and restore the RHEL 7 behavior?
10 p.m.
Aarggh, I had a cat attacking my hands at one moment. I meant:
/usr/share/doc/%}package}-%{version}/README.md
/usr/share/doc/%{package}-%{version}/LICENSE.md
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 10:07 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I've been trying to bundle the current ansible-5.0.1 release as an RPM
> for Fedora and EPEL use. Leaving aside the peculiar decisions to
> replace the pypi.org "ansible" tarball with a tarball of roughly 150
> modules from the "ansiblee-collections" repos, and moving the actual
> ansible software to a distinct python tarball called "ansible-core"
> without changing the source repo or the actual critical installed
> python modules, the new "ansible" has more than 300 files called
> "README.md" and more than 100 files called "LICENSE.md".
>
> This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the '%doc' and
> '%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
> install them directly at the top of the docdir.
>
> Basicely these only generate one file:
>
> %doc README.md
> %doc dir1/README.md
> %doc dir2/README.md
>
> %license LICENSE.md
> %license dir1/LICENSE
> %license dir2/LICENSE.md
>
> When compiled, these would only produce:
>
> /usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/README.md
> /usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/LICENSE.md
>
> RHEL 7 didn't have this problem. I'm not sure if other folks have
> noticed this for tools that are built with multiple internal tarballs.
> The new "ansible" tarball is fairly unique ints authors insistance on
> putting more than one hundred distinct third party packages in the
> same master tarball. But for now, this is going to cause a license and
> documentation problem in packaging it due to an "optimization" of
> stripping out the directory names of document files and licenses.
>
> Does anyone know a decent workaround, or a specfile setting to disable
> this filename stripping and restore the RHEL 7 behavior?
12:48 a.m.
Nico Kadel-Garcia kirjoitti 5.12.2021 klo 5.07:
I've been trying to bundle the current ansible-5.0.1 release as
an RPM
for Fedora and EPEL use. Leaving aside the peculiar decisions to
replace the pypi.org "ansible" tarball with a tarball of roughly 150
modules from the "ansiblee-collections" repos, and moving the actual
ansible software to a distinct python tarball called "ansible-core"
without changing the source repo or the actual critical installed
python modules, the new "ansible" has more than 300 files called
"README.md" and more than 100 files called "LICENSE.md".
This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the '%doc' and
'%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
install them directly at the top of the docdir.
Basicely these only generate one file:
%doc README.md
%doc dir1/README.md
%doc dir2/README.md
%license LICENSE.md
%license dir1/LICENSE
%license dir2/LICENSE.md
When compiled, these would only produce:
/usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/README.md
/usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/LICENSE.md
Path stripping only happens if you list relative paths with %doc or
%license, which which case rpm looks for them from the build directory.
If you specify absolute paths, rpm looks for them in the buildroot like
it does for any other files. See section %doc and %license at rpm spec
file format reference [1].
So something like this should work:
%install
cp README.md
%{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/doc/%{package}-%{version}/README.md
cp dir1/README.md
%{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/doc/%{package}-%{version}/dir1/README.md
# ...
%files
%doc %{_datadir}/doc/%{package}-%{version}/README.md
%doc %{_datadir}/doc/%{package}-%{version}/dir1/README.md
# ...
[1]: https://rpm-software-management.github.io/rpm/manual/spec.html
Otto
1:30 a.m.
On Sun, Dec 5, 2021 at 1:49 AM Otto Urpelainen <oturpe(a)iki.fi> wrote:
Nico Kadel-Garcia kirjoitti 5.12.2021 klo 5.07:
> I've been trying to bundle the current ansible-5.0.1 release as an RPM
> for Fedora and EPEL use. Leaving aside the peculiar decisions to
> replace the pypi.org "ansible" tarball with a tarball of roughly 150
> modules from the "ansiblee-collections" repos, and moving the actual
> ansible software to a distinct python tarball called "ansible-core"
> without changing the source repo or the actual critical installed
> python modules, the new "ansible" has more than 300 files called
> "README.md" and more than 100 files called "LICENSE.md".
>
> This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the '%doc' and
> '%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
> install them directly at the top of the docdir.
>
> Basicely these only generate one file:
>
> %doc README.md
> %doc dir1/README.md
> %doc dir2/README.md
>
> %license LICENSE.md
> %license dir1/LICENSE
> %license dir2/LICENSE.md
>
> When compiled, these would only produce:
>
> /usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/README.md
> /usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/LICENSE.md
Path stripping only happens if you list relative paths with %doc or
%license, which which case rpm looks for them from the build directory.
If you specify absolute paths, rpm looks for them in the buildroot like
it does for any other files. See section %doc and %license at rpm spec
file format reference [1].
So something like this should work:
%install
cp README.md
%{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/doc/%{package}-%{version}/README.md
cp dir1/README.md
%{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/doc/%{package}-%{version}/dir1/README.md
# ...
%files
%doc %{_datadir}/doc/%{package}-%{version}/README.md
%doc %{_datadir}/doc/%{package}-%{version}/dir1/README.md
# ...
[1]: https://rpm-software-management.github.io/rpm/manual/spec.html
Otto
I'm reading that documentation. It says *nothing* about path
stripping, a behavior which has apparently changed sometime since RHEL
7 or its ancestorFedora 12. So if this is expected behavior, I'd like
to see it documented.
Does anyone know how to turn it off for '%doc' and ''%license'? It
doesn't seem to be in the macros, and diving into the C code to get
this change reverted for a future release of rpm seems.... like a very
long term goal. It seems to me to be unwelcome and undesirable
behavior for precisely the kind of situation of 'ansible tarball has
more than 300 README.md files'. And given my previous concerns about
that very large bundle, I suspect I'll not have good success getting
the authors to discard it and use a more typical factored python
submodule distribution.
9:51 a.m.
The webkit2gtk3 package has a %add_to_license_files macro that you can
copy as a workaround, but you might not be satisfied because it
requires listing each affected file individually....
2:19 p.m.
On Sun, Dec 5, 2021 at 10:51 AM Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro(a)gnome.org> wrote:
The webkit2gtk3 package has a %add_to_license_files macro that you can
copy as a workaround, but you might not be satisfied because it
requires listing each affected file individually....
I have no moral issue with listing them individually. Listing them in
a single long line breaks rpm very thoroughly, due to the resulting
%doc line of over 20,000 characters. It's another confusing
consequence of the more than 100 ansible galaxy modules in the same
python tarball.
2:58 a.m.
On 05/12/2021 04:07, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the
'%doc' and
'%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
install them directly at the top of the docdir.
You should deal with them manually.
Example:
https://github.com/rpmfusion/tg_owt/blob/master/tg_owt.spec#L124-L161
https://github.com/rpmfusion/tg_owt/blob/master/tg_owt.spec#L178-L179
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vitaly(a)easycoding.org)
6:43 p.m.
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 3:59 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On 05/12/2021 04:07, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the '%doc' and
> '%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
> install them directly at the top of the docdir.
You should deal with them manually.
Example:
https://github.com/rpmfusion/tg_owt/blob/master/tg_owt.spec#L124-L161
https://github.com/rpmfusion/tg_owt/blob/master/tg_owt.spec#L178-L179
Simply put, "no". Manually organizing component names for more than
300 README files and more than 100 LICENSE files does not seem a wise
use of anyone's package compilation time.
If it's necessary, I could see doing something like this instead, or
using a local macro
cp -D ansible_collections/foo/bar/baz/README.md
%{buildroot}%{defaultdocdir}/%{package}-%{version}/foo/bbar/baz/README.md
I'll still want to separate '%license" files from "%doc", which
means
I won't just be able to use:
%doc %{defaultdocdir}/%{package}-%{version}
7:09 p.m.
On Monday, December 6, 2021 6:43:57 PM CST Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 3:59 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> On 05/12/2021 04:07, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the '%doc' and
> > '%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
> > install them directly at the top of the docdir.
>
> You should deal with them manually.
>
> Example:
> https://github.com/rpmfusion/tg_owt/blob/master/tg_owt.spec#L124-L161
> https://github.com/rpmfusion/tg_owt/blob/master/tg_owt.spec#L178-L179
Simply put, "no". Manually organizing component names for more than
300 README files and more than 100 LICENSE files does not seem a wise
use of anyone's package compilation time.
If it's necessary, I could see doing something like this instead, or
using a local macro
cp -D ansible_collections/foo/bar/baz/README.md
%{buildroot}%{defaultdocdir}/%{package}-%{version}/foo/bbar/baz/README.md
I'll still want to separate '%license" files from "%doc", which
means
I won't just be able to use:
%doc %{defaultdocdir}/%{package}-%{version
The specfile that Vitaly linked also marks the license files with `%license`.
--
Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/Him/His
PGP Key Fingerprint: f57c76e5a238fe0a628e2ecef79e4e25e8c661f8
PGP Keyserver: hkp://keyserver.ubuntu.com
gotmax(a)e.email
8:20 p.m.
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 8:09 PM Maxwell G <gotmax(a)e.email> wrote:
On Monday, December 6, 2021 6:43:57 PM CST Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 3:59 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 05/12/2021 04:07, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > > This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the '%doc'
and
> > > '%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
> > > install them directly at the top of the docdir.
> >
> > You should deal with them manually.
> >
> > Example:
> > https://github.com/rpmfusion/tg_owt/blob/master/tg_owt.spec#L124-L161
> > https://github.com/rpmfusion/tg_owt/blob/master/tg_owt.spec#L178-L179
>
> Simply put, "no". Manually organizing component names for more than
> 300 README files and more than 100 LICENSE files does not seem a wise
> use of anyone's package compilation time.
>
> If it's necessary, I could see doing something like this instead, or
> using a local macro
>
> cp -D ansible_collections/foo/bar/baz/README.md
> %{buildroot}%{defaultdocdir}/%{package}-%{version}/foo/bbar/baz/README.md
>
> I'll still want to separate '%license" files from "%doc",
which means
> I won't just be able to use:
>
> %doc %{defaultdocdir}/%{package}-%{version
The specfile that Vitaly linked also marks the license files with `%license`.
I'm staring at that pull request, which is similar to my tesstable
.spec file in various ways. Mind you, in my testing setup, I use:
BuildRequires: ansible-core >= 2.11.0
BuildRequires: ansible-core < 2.13.0
Requires: ansible-core >= 2.11.0
Requires: ansible-core < 2.13.0
ansible-5.x works well with ansible-core 2.11, the 2.12 requirement
and the related python 3.8 requirement seem to be spurious for the
pypo.org published ansible tarball of hundreds of ansible galaxy
modules.
The suggestion there that those dependencies should be autogenerated
does not and will not work because of the mislabeling of the tarball
with all the actualy core python modules called "ansible" within the
"ansible-core" tarball and RPM, and mislabeling of the moe than 100
ansible_collections python submodules as the new "ansible" tarball.
And yes, I'm being a bit harsh about that split and calling it a
mislabeling, since it's inconsistent and breaks automated processing.
7:06 p.m.
New subject: rpm bug for multiple README.md or LICENSE.md in EPEL 8 and
Fedora
Dec 4, 2021 9:09:24 PM Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel(a)gmail.com>:
I've been trying to bundle the current ansible-5.0.1 release as
an RPM
for Fedora and EPEL use. Leaving aside the peculiar decisions to
replace the pypi.org "ansible" tarball with a tarball of roughly 150
modules from the "ansiblee-collections" repos, and moving the actual
ansible software to a distinct python tarball called "ansible-core"
without changing the source repo or the actual critical installed
python modules, the new "ansible" has more than 300 files called
"README.md" and more than 100 files called "LICENSE.md".
This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the '%doc' and
'%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
install them directly at the top of the docdir.
Basicely these only generate one file:
%doc README.md
%doc dir1/README.md
%doc dir2/README.md
%license LICENSE.md
%license dir1/LICENSE
%license dir2/LICENSE.md
When compiled, these would only produce:
/usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/README.md
/usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/LICENSE.md
RHEL 7 didn't have this problem. I'm not sure if other folks have
noticed this for tools that are built with multiple internal tarballs.
The new "ansible" tarball is fairly unique ints authors insistance on
putting more than one hundred distinct third party packages in the
same master tarball. But for now, this is going to cause a license and
documentation problem in packaging it due to an "optimization" of
stripping out the directory names of document files and licenses.
Does anyone know a decent workaround, or a specfile setting to disable
this filename stripping and restore the RHEL 7 behavior?
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Take a look at this PR[1] on Fedora's `ansible` package for a potential
solution.
Thanks,
Maxwell
[1]: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ansible/pull-request/19
--
Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/Him/His
PGP Key Fingerprint: f57c76e5a238fe0a628e2ecef79e4e25e8c661f8
gotmax(a)e.email
4:40 a.m.
On 12/5/21 05:07, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
I've been trying to bundle the current ansible-5.0.1 release as
an RPM
for Fedora and EPEL use. Leaving aside the peculiar decisions to
replace the pypi.org "ansible" tarball with a tarball of roughly 150
modules from the "ansiblee-collections" repos, and moving the actual
ansible software to a distinct python tarball called "ansible-core"
without changing the source repo or the actual critical installed
python modules, the new "ansible" has more than 300 files called
"README.md" and more than 100 files called "LICENSE.md".
This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the '%doc' and
'%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
install them directly at the top of the docdir.
Basicely these only generate one file:
%doc README.md
%doc dir1/README.md
%doc dir2/README.md
%license LICENSE.md
%license dir1/LICENSE
%license dir2/LICENSE.md
When compiled, these would only produce:
/usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/README.md
/usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/LICENSE.md
RHEL 7 didn't have this problem. I'm not sure if other folks have
noticed this for tools that are built with multiple internal tarballs.
The new "ansible" tarball is fairly unique ints authors insistance on
putting more than one hundred distinct third party packages in the
same master tarball. But for now, this is going to cause a license and
documentation problem in packaging it due to an "optimization" of
stripping out the directory names of document files and licenses.
Does anyone know a decent workaround, or a specfile setting to disable
this filename stripping and restore the RHEL 7 behavior?
There were changes in how %doc is handled around rpm 4.13 (whereas
RHEL-7 has 4.11), maybe there's a regression that nobody noticed (or
complained about) until now. The use-case there seems quite reasonable
to me.
File a bug on rpm (preferably upstream ticket) to have it looked at.
- Panu -
8:18 a.m.
On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 5:46 AM Panu Matilainen <pmatilai(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 12/5/21 05:07, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> I've been trying to bundle the current ansible-5.0.1 release as an RPM
> for Fedora and EPEL use. Leaving aside the peculiar decisions to
> replace the pypi.org "ansible" tarball with a tarball of roughly 150
> modules from the "ansiblee-collections" repos, and moving the actual
> ansible software to a distinct python tarball called "ansible-core"
> without changing the source repo or the actual critical installed
> python modules, the new "ansible" has more than 300 files called
> "README.md" and more than 100 files called "LICENSE.md".
>
> This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the '%doc' and
> '%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
> install them directly at the top of the docdir.
>
> Basicely these only generate one file:
>
> %doc README.md
> %doc dir1/README.md
> %doc dir2/README.md
>
> %license LICENSE.md
> %license dir1/LICENSE
> %license dir2/LICENSE.md
>
> When compiled, these would only produce:
>
> /usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/README.md
> /usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/LICENSE.md
>
> RHEL 7 didn't have this problem. I'm not sure if other folks have
> noticed this for tools that are built with multiple internal tarballs.
> The new "ansible" tarball is fairly unique ints authors insistance on
> putting more than one hundred distinct third party packages in the
> same master tarball. But for now, this is going to cause a license and
> documentation problem in packaging it due to an "optimization" of
> stripping out the directory names of document files and licenses.
>
> Does anyone know a decent workaround, or a specfile setting to disable
> this filename stripping and restore the RHEL 7 behavior?
There were changes in how %doc is handled around rpm 4.13 (whereas
RHEL-7 has 4.11), maybe there's a regression that nobody noticed (or
complained about) until now. The use-case there seems quite reasonable
to me.
File a bug on rpm (preferably upstream ticket) to have it looked at.
- Panu -
I've submitted one, at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2029877 .
It seems that the problem existed as well with earlier versions of
rpmbuild, say on RHEL 7, but the warning messages about "files listed
twice" weren't generated. And various slightly differently named
README.md and LICENSE.md files make it not as obvious as one might
expect.
9:52 a.m.
Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
It seems that the problem existed as well with earlier versions of
rpmbuild, say on RHEL 7, but the warning messages about "files listed
twice" weren't generated. And various slightly differently named
README.md and LICENSE.md files make it not as obvious as one might
expect.
The thing is, the path stripping of %doc path/to/README is a feature. The
directory path in the sources is not necessarily useful to replicate in the
installed documentation directory. Removing that path stripping would be an
incompatible change and make the doc directories of some packages a mess of
unnecessary subdirectories. If desired, this needs a new syntax that does
not clash with existing usage.
Kevin Kofler
10:55 a.m.
On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 11:21 AM Kevin Kofler via devel
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
The thing is, the path stripping of %doc path/to/README is a feature.
The
directory path in the sources is not necessarily useful to replicate in the
installed documentation directory. Removing that path stripping would be an
incompatible change and make the doc directories of some packages a mess of
unnecessary subdirectories. If desired, this needs a new syntax that does
not clash with existing usage.
Kevin Kofler
A binary '__doc_path_stripping' flag, set to "true" by default, might
serve to preserve the paths and avoid overlaps if and as desired. I'd
agree that changing default behavior should be unwelcome.
This path stripping behavior is not mentioned in the RPM
documentation, though people may have become accustomed to it. And
"not necessarily useful" does not mean "never useful", as we are
seeing right now.
1:45 a.m.
On 12/7/21 16:18, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 5:46 AM Panu Matilainen
<pmatilai(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/5/21 05:07, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>> I've been trying to bundle the current ansible-5.0.1 release as an RPM
>> for Fedora and EPEL use. Leaving aside the peculiar decisions to
>> replace the pypi.org "ansible" tarball with a tarball of roughly 150
>> modules from the "ansiblee-collections" repos, and moving the actual
>> ansible software to a distinct python tarball called "ansible-core"
>> without changing the source repo or the actual critical installed
>> python modules, the new "ansible" has more than 300 files called
>> "README.md" and more than 100 files called "LICENSE.md".
>>
>> This breaks building RPMs for EPEL 8 or Fedora, because the '%doc' and
>> '%license' macros strip off the subdirectories of the files and
>> install them directly at the top of the docdir.
>>
>> Basicely these only generate one file:
>>
>> %doc README.md
>> %doc dir1/README.md
>> %doc dir2/README.md
>>
>> %license LICENSE.md
>> %license dir1/LICENSE
>> %license dir2/LICENSE.md
>>
>> When compiled, these would only produce:
>>
>> /usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/README.md
>> /usr/share/doc/package-%{fersion}/LICENSE.md
>>
>> RHEL 7 didn't have this problem. I'm not sure if other folks have
>> noticed this for tools that are built with multiple internal tarballs.
>> The new "ansible" tarball is fairly unique ints authors insistance on
>> putting more than one hundred distinct third party packages in the
>> same master tarball. But for now, this is going to cause a license and
>> documentation problem in packaging it due to an "optimization" of
>> stripping out the directory names of document files and licenses.
>>
>> Does anyone know a decent workaround, or a specfile setting to disable
>> this filename stripping and restore the RHEL 7 behavior?
>
> There were changes in how %doc is handled around rpm 4.13 (whereas
> RHEL-7 has 4.11), maybe there's a regression that nobody noticed (or
> complained about) until now. The use-case there seems quite reasonable
> to me.
>
> File a bug on rpm (preferably upstream ticket) to have it looked at.
>
> - Panu -
I've submitted one, at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2029877 .
It seems that the problem existed as well with earlier versions of
rpmbuild, say on RHEL 7, but the warning messages about "files listed
twice" weren't generated. And various slightly differently named
README.md and LICENSE.md files make it not as obvious as one might
expect.
Okay, but since it happens on RHEL 7 too then there's no regression. I
thought the leading directories were always stripped but given your
strong statement about RHEL 7 not having this issue I thought maybe I'm
missing something.
The current behavior is good for other use-cases and we can't go just
changing it, but this is a totally legit (and common, I think) use-case
so maybe we can come up with something to optionally not strip leading
directories.
- Panu -
660
days inactive
663
days old
15 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Kevin Kofler -
Maxwell G -
Maxwell G (＠gotmax23)
-
Michael Catanzaro -
Nico Kadel-Garcia -
Otto Urpelainen -
Panu Matilainen -
Vitaly Zaitsev