Triggers just to avoid unowned directories?

[Robert Relyea]

On 09/01/2009 06:34 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 07:35 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>    
>> The packaging style in the  nss-softokn  package continues to bug me.
>>
>> There are RPM triggers being used to install/remove a prelink config file
>> whenever the prelink package gets installed/removed. According to a comment
>> in the spec file, it is only done like that because the package doesn't
>> want to own the  /etc/prelink.conf.d  directory. Nothing else is run in
>> the scriptlets, just a file is moved or deleted.
>>
>> Previously, albeit in the different nss package, it used to be duplicate
>> directory ownership:
>>
>>    $ repoquery --whatprovides /etc/prelink.conf.d
>>    prelink-0:0.4.0-7.fc11.i586
>>    nss-0:3.12.3.99.3-2.11.4.fc11.i586
>>    nss-0:3.12.3-4.fc11.i586
>>
>> Is this a result of the recent move to avoid duplicate directory
>> ownership?
>>      
> rpm could start refcounting directories any day now and that'd be just
> fine.
>
> Some people like multiple ownership, some don't.  The package guidelines
> recommend against it, but don't forbid it.  It's a judgement call.  In
> this particular case I think multiple ownership of the directory is
> better than triggers, but that moving /etc/prelink.conf.d to filesystem
> would be even better.
>    
triggers were the suggestion of the package reviewer to avoid 
multi-ownership(IIRC). If there is unanimity on what the correct 
solution should be, I'm sure Elio would be happy to implement it. Moving 
/etc/prelink.conf.d to filesystem would obviously be the simplest for 
the nss package.

bob



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3420 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090901/e37b3bd1/attachment.bin