On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:42:11AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2011-03-31 at 00:14 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > On 03/31/2011 12:01 AM, Miloslav TrmaÄ wrote: > > > What more would you want? "Fedora packages must follow the FHS. 'Must > > > follow' means that if you don't follow it you violate it?" > > > > But FHS permits this change to be done by distributions. All it says is > > that it should be carefully considered. > > Right. Some of the language on the packaging guidelines page seems to > imply a belief that 'follow the FHS' means 'place all data in > directories explicitly listed in the FHS', but the FHS itself doesn't > require that. Hence my suggestion that requirement is vague. > If the FHS doesn't require that then we need to add that to our guidelines. Part of the purpose of the FHS is defeated if packages within a distribution (and indeed, third party packages that aren't packaged by a distribution) do not place their files inside of the hierachies that are specified. If the new directories are not categorized properly, *all* of the purposes of the FHS can be defeated (for instance, if apache designated its own toplevel directory the FHS goals of separating files needing backup from those that are reinstallable from a package and separating files that are read-only from those that need to be written to would be defeated.) The intent of the Fedora Packaging Guidelines, at least, is that Fedora packages don't create extra directories and store things in them. Creating extra directories should not be done without approval. I've opened a FPC ticket to both make that explicit and to add /run as an approved directory: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/75 -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpMiSF8jRsyL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
