[Bug 705043] Review Request: paco - a source code package organizer for Unix

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=705043

--- Comment #9 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola at iki.fi> 2011-07-17 14:27:58 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> > Giving the full icon path in the .desktop file is fine, but it's recommended to simply use the basename of the icon file
> 
> The reason I added the full path to the desktop file was that the basename
> didn't work for me (the icon didn't show up with the menu entry). I came to the
> conclusion that the icon should be installed somewhere in the /usr/share/icons
> tree instead of /usr/share/pixmaps for that to work - please correct me if I'm
> wrong.

Nope, /usr/share/pixmaps works just fine.

> > As has already been stated on fedora-devel, it is generally preferred to delete the files you don't want to ship at the end of %install, instead of excluding them in %files.
> 
> Is there any specific advantage/reason/logic for doing this? I've changed the
> spec to do this, but to me using an "exclude" command in the files section
> seems more logical (and easier to understand) than just removing those files
> during %install.

%exclude is usually only used, when you want to use wildcards in the %files
section of a given (sub)package, but at the same time place a specific file in
another subpackage. For instance:

 %files
 %defattr(-,root,root,-)
 %{_bindir}/foo-*
 %exclude %{_bindir}/foo-bar

 %files bar
 %defattr(-,root,root,-)
 %{_bindir}/foo-bar

Freeminded use of %excludes can lead to trouble, since you might end up with
files that are not packaged altogether...

> As for the shared library, my understanding is that it's not meant to be used
> by other applications - it's only designed for internal use by paco to log
> installations (and that would probably explain the exit calls in the library
> too). paco doesn't install any header files either. However, I might be missing
> something here.

... but the existence of pkgconfig stuff would lead to think the contrary,
would it not?

Please contact upstream to clarify this issue.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.