Jeremy Katz <katzj@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 16:12 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: >> This is merely an rpmlink complaint. Symlinks aren't mentioned in the >> packaging policy at all. > The chroot concern is real, though. And unless there's a really good > reason for it, symlinks _should_ be relative. Even if all they have in > common is /. Can you show an example where that actually helps? I can think of a number of cases where it'd be a bad idea, and none where it really solves a problem. I'm interested in this because I'm about to stick a symlink to /usr/share/zoneinfo into one of my packages, and I cannot see a good reason to spell it as ../../../../usr/share/zoneinfo. regards, tom lane -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
