On Sat, 2006-01-14 at 20:53 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > /usr/share/xml is owned by several packages right now: [...] > Should new packages depend on xml-common instead of owning it If they use something else than just expect the dir to be present from xml-common, I'd say depend on it. On the other hand, some of these own it for cleanup-on-erase purposes (at least cvs2cl does, will fix), so those can just have a dependency on the dir. IMHO, it doesn't matter that much if some others than xml-common own it, as long as it's not unowned. (Again assuming rpm's erase ordering issues will be fixed.) > or does /usr/share/xml really belong in filesystem? FHS says it's optional and "must be in /usr/share, if the corresponding subsystem is installed". xml-common probably qualifies as such a subsystem, and thus sounds like the correct package to include it in. http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SPECIFICOPTIONS15
