Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 18:06 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> Gianluca Sforna wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Miloslav Trmač <mitr@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Please review use of %config without noreplace in your packages, and add
>>>> noreplace if appropriate. The list of affected packages is below.
>>> <snip>
>>>> giallu alleyoop
>>> this is because of:
>>> %config %{_sysconfdir}/gconf/schemas/*.schemas
>>>
>>> I checked other packages and it seems they are not marking with
>>> %config the files in /etc/gconf/schemas.
>>>
>>> So, may I safely drop this?
>> Yes, gconf schemas are data, not %config.
>>
>>> In that case, maybe rpmlint should grow a rule to not return:
>>> alleyoop.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/alleyoop.schemas
>>> on the resulting rpm?
>> File a bug and let the rpmlint maintainers see what they think.
>
> Isn't the bug more likely in gconf? If these are data they should not be
> in /etc but /usr (according to FHS).
>
> I note that openSUSE has a feature request for this:
>
> https://features.opensuse.org/305318
>
> which claims that Debian does it already. What's upstream's take on
> this?
This has been discussed before on both Fedora and upstream lists. IIRC,
upstream admitted it's a flaw but decided that making changes had the
potential to break too much existing software.
If you have the energy to move this forward I'd agree that %{_datadir}
is a better place for it and if Debian's been successful in moving
schemas there, it might invalidate the breakage argument.
-Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
