Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468517
--- Comment #8 from Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-10-28 12:08:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7)
I quite don't understand if you still insist on not owning the package. In case yes, I don't see what would we gain here, except for having a slight possibility of the package leaving a stale unowned directory.
* Please be consistent with other packages - Currently only 1 (binary) package (shared-mime-info) owns /usr/share/mime - While 81 packages have files under /usr/share/mime/packages (including shared-mime-info)
If you want to make it sure that /usr/share/mime is owned by some packages when shared-mime-info is not installed (current packaging guidelines is against this), this is for packaging guidelines issue (you can suggest that this directory must be in filesystem package or so).
ref: - 18 packages (??) own /usr/share/icons/hicolor - While 637 packages have files under /usr/share/icons/hicolor/*/apps
* And I don't think that XML files under the directory are useful when shared-mime-info is not installed.
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
I don't see this SEGV on -3, thanks.