Files in /usr/share/mime don't have owners

[Miro Hrončok]

Hello,

an interesting problem has been reported in Bugzilla 3 years ago:

     https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1486468

tl;dr There are generated files in /usr/share/mime without owning packages.


When update-mime-database database is run (by RPM trigger), files are generated 
in /usr/share/mime, such as:

/usr/share/mime
├── XMLnamespaces
├── aliases
├── application
│   ├── andrew-inset.xml
│   ├── annodex.xml
│   ├── ...
│   └── zstd.xml
├── ...
├── x-content
│   ├── audio-cdda.xml
│   ├── ....
│   └── win32-software.xml
└── x-epoc
     └── x-sisx-app.xml


The files are generated based on content form multiple packages. I.e. 
shared-mime-info cannot list all the files as %ghosts because the list of files 
is volatile.


As a specific example, on my system, I have:

   /usr/share/mime/application/x-openscad.xml
   /usr/share/mime/packages/openscad.xml


The file in packages/ is shipped and owned by the openscad package.
The file in application/ is generated by update-mime-database.


So I guess the questions are:

Should shared-mime-info %ghost all files created by update-mime-database when 
only shared-mime-info is installed? (That seems to be easy enough).

Should individual packages shipping mime files %ghost the files generated from 
them? E.g. should openscad %ghost /usr/share/mime/application/x-openscad.xml?

Is there a better (possibly automated) way of doing it? Or is it not worth it 
and we simply say that the files are OK not being owned?

-- 
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: [phone]
IRC: mhroncok

[Andy Mender]

On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 at 12:13, Miro Hrončok <mhroncok(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  Hello,
>
>  an interesting problem has been reported in Bugzilla 3 years ago:
>
>       https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1486468
>
>  tl;dr There are generated files in /usr/share/mime without owning packages.
>
>
>  When update-mime-database database is run (by RPM trigger), files are
>  generated
>  in /usr/share/mime, such as:
>
>  /usr/share/mime
>  ├── XMLnamespaces
>  ├── aliases
>  ├── application
>  │   ├── andrew-inset.xml
>  │   ├── annodex.xml
>  │   ├── ...
>  │   └── zstd.xml
>  ├── ...
>  ├── x-content
>  │   ├── audio-cdda.xml
>  │   ├── ....
>  │   └── win32-software.xml
>  └── x-epoc
>       └── x-sisx-app.xml
>
>
>  The files are generated based on content form multiple packages. I.e.
>  shared-mime-info cannot list all the files as %ghosts because the list of
>  files
>  is volatile.
>
>
>  As a specific example, on my system, I have:
>
>     /usr/share/mime/application/x-openscad.xml
>     /usr/share/mime/packages/openscad.xml
>
>
>  The file in packages/ is shipped and owned by the openscad package.
>  The file in application/ is generated by update-mime-database.
>
>
>  So I guess the questions are:
>
>  Should shared-mime-info %ghost all files created by update-mime-database
>  when
>  only shared-mime-info is installed? (That seems to be easy enough).
>
>  Should individual packages shipping mime files %ghost the files generated
>  from
>  them? E.g. should openscad %ghost
>  /usr/share/mime/application/x-openscad.xml?
>
>  Is there a better (possibly automated) way of doing it? Or is it not worth
>  it
>  and we simply say that the files are OK not being owned? 

I'd be in favor of option #1 - make shared-mime-info %ghost the
/usr/share/mime dir.
Regarding openscad (and other packages providing mime files), does it then
need to
Requires shared-mime-info explicitly?

Option #2 would require extra leg work here and there. Also, it might
entail a packaging-wide
expectation that packages providing mime info should %ghost /usr/share/mime.

[Miro Hrončok]

On 02. 09. 20 21:00, Andy Mender wrote:
>  
>  I'd be in favor of option #1 - make shared-mime-info %ghost the /usr/share/mime 
>  dir. 
It's not about the dir, but the contents.

>  Regarding openscad (and other packages providing mime files), does it
> then need to
>  Requires shared-mime-info explicitly? 
Even if they require the package, the files generated in there still wouldn't 
have owners.

>  Option #2 would require extra leg work here and there. Also, it might
> entail a 
>  packaging-wide
>  expectation that packages providing mime info should %ghost /usr/share/mime. 
They would need to %ghost the actual created file(s).

-- 
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: [phone]
IRC: mhroncok

[Sérgio Basto]

On Wed, 2020-09-02 at 12:12 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>  Hello,
>  
>  an interesting problem has been reported in Bugzilla 3 years ago:
>  
>       https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1486468
>  
>  tl;dr There are generated files in /usr/share/mime without owning
>  packages.
>  
>  
>  When update-mime-database database is run (by RPM trigger), files are
>  generated 
>  in /usr/share/mime, such as:
>  
>  /usr/share/mime
>  ├── XMLnamespaces
>  ├── aliases
>  ├── application
>  │   ├── andrew-inset.xml
>  │   ├── annodex.xml
>  │   ├── ...
>  │   └── zstd.xml
>  ├── ...
>  ├── x-content
>  │   ├── audio-cdda.xml
>  │   ├── ....
>  │   └── win32-software.xml
>  └── x-epoc
>       └── x-sisx-app.xml
>  
>  
>  The files are generated based on content form multiple packages.
>  I.e. 
>  shared-mime-info cannot list all the files as %ghosts because the
>  list of files 
>  is volatile.
>  
>  
>  As a specific example, on my system, I have:
>  
>     /usr/share/mime/application/x-openscad.xml
>     /usr/share/mime/packages/openscad.xml
>  
>  
>  The file in packages/ is shipped and owned by the openscad package.
>  The file in application/ is generated by update-mime-database.
>  
>  
>  So I guess the questions are:
>  
>  Should shared-mime-info %ghost all files created by update-mime-
>  database when 
>  only shared-mime-info is installed? (That seems to be easy enough).
>  
>  Should individual packages shipping mime files %ghost the files
>  generated from 
>  them? E.g. should openscad %ghost /usr/share/mime/application/x-
>  openscad.xml?
>  
>  Is there a better (possibly automated) way of doing it? Or is it not
>  worth it 
>  and we simply say that the files are OK not being owned? 

I think and at least for me, it very common have also mime files in
[1] Conclusion, is very difficult track files generated by update-mime-database 


[1] 
$HOME/.local/share/mime/application/   

-- 
Sérgio M. B.

[Patrick Riehecky]

On Wed, 2020-09-02 at 21:54 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>  On Wed, 2020-09-02 at 12:12 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>  > Hello,
>  > 
>  > an interesting problem has been reported in Bugzilla 3 years ago:
>  > 
>  >      
>  >
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugzilla.redhat.com_...
>  >  
>  > 
>  > tl;dr There are generated files in /usr/share/mime without owning
>  > packages.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > When update-mime-database database is run (by RPM trigger), files
>  > are
>  > generated 
>  > in /usr/share/mime, such as:
>  > 
>  > /usr/share/mime
>  > ├── XMLnamespaces
>  > ├── aliases
>  > ├── application
>  > │   ├── andrew-inset.xml
>  > │   ├── annodex.xml
>  > │   ├── ...
>  > │   └── zstd.xml
>  > ├── ...
>  > ├── x-content
>  > │   ├── audio-cdda.xml
>  > │   ├── ....
>  > │   └── win32-software.xml
>  > └── x-epoc
>  >      └── x-sisx-app.xml
>  > 
>  > 
>  > The files are generated based on content form multiple packages.
>  > I.e. 
>  > shared-mime-info cannot list all the files as %ghosts because the
>  > list of files 
>  > is volatile.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > As a specific example, on my system, I have:
>  > 
>  >    /usr/share/mime/application/x-openscad.xml
>  >    /usr/share/mime/packages/openscad.xml
>  > 
>  > 
>  > The file in packages/ is shipped and owned by the openscad package.
>  > The file in application/ is generated by update-mime-database.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > So I guess the questions are:
>  > 
>  > Should shared-mime-info %ghost all files created by update-mime-
>  > database when 
>  > only shared-mime-info is installed? (That seems to be easy enough).
>  > 
>  > Should individual packages shipping mime files %ghost the files
>  > generated from 
>  > them? E.g. should openscad %ghost /usr/share/mime/application/x-
>  > openscad.xml?
>  > 
>  > Is there a better (possibly automated) way of doing it? Or is it
>  > not
>  > worth it 
>  > and we simply say that the files are OK not being owned?
>  
>  I think and at least for me, it very common have also mime files in
>  [1] Conclusion, is very difficult track files generated by update-
>  mime-database 
>  
>  
>  [1] 
>  $HOME/.local/share/mime/application/   
>  
>  
Generally speaking, I'd not want files inside of $HOME to be owned by
rpm.  But when the system generates mime info in /usr/share/mime/ I
feel like that should 'come from somewhere'.

Pat