On Fri, 10 Dec 2010, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 08:40:23PM +0900, Mamoru Tasaka wrote: >> Thomas Moschny wrote, at 12/10/2010 08:19 PM +9:00: >>> That seems by far the cleanest solution to me. Especially >>> development-oriented packages often contain example directories; >>> removing x-bits there only puts extra-burden on someone trying to play >>> with the examples. >> >> Indeed some examples/ directory contains some executable scripts >> which are useful to understand what the package can do. >> I think "%doc files must not have executable permissions" must be >> reverted. >> > To my mind, if you have examples that you want to be runnable by the user > and you want them to not have to perform chmod 0755 to achieve that, you'd > also want rpm to ensure that the dependencies for those examples are > installed. > > Alternately, the user can be expected to chmod the scripts and install the > necessary deps themselves. > > So either this guideline is fine or the idea that examples shouldn't drag in > new deps is where the flaw lies. Indeed. If the example scripts are supposed to be runnable, then dependencies should be generated for them (whether such material should be placed in %doc at all is another question). And if not, missing execute-permissions serve as a clue that it's not something you can expect to successfully run as-is. - Panu - -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
