On 10/26/2010 03:09 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 02:10:23PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>>
>> > kernel.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
>> > /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/build
>> > ../../../usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64
>> >
>> > (It seems odd that /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/build is packaged in
>> > kernel, but the symlink it points to is in kernel-devel. Is there a reason that
>> > the /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/build ownership isn't in kernel-devel?)
>>
>> We flip-flopped on this a few years ago. It used to be that way iirc, but I'm
>> not recalling the exact reasoning for why it changed.
>
> I think the problem was the -devel package could be installed without a
> kernel package behind it making it awkward to install a symlink. Even if
> you just dropped the symlink on the floor, installing the kernel later
> would never re-create the symlink leaving things broken.
>
> IIRC, the dangling symlink was the lesser of two evils.
Well, all the real "meat" is in kernel-devel, except for the
/lib/modules/%{version}-%{release}.%{_arch}/build symlink which is in
kernel. My point was that it seems to make sense to just put that
symlink in kernel-devel as well, that way, you either have kernel-devel
installed (and have all the files and the symlink) or you don't.
As is, if you just have kernel installed (and not kernel-devel), you
currently have a dangling symlink.
~spot
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list
kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
