On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 10:06 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2012, Matthew Miller wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 03:18:25PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > >> To build such an image I'd really would have preferred not installing > >> the docs. It appears rpm once had a feature for that where you could add > >> excludedocs in rpmrc. This feature seems to have been removed. Why? Can > >> we get that back? Or can I enable this for yum in some other way? Anyone > >> has an idea? > > > > +1 to this, although note that we currently ship licenses as doc files, and > > so that might need to go by packaging/legal. > > > > There's a yum plugin which sets RPM transaction flags (yum-plugin-tsflags), > > and with that we could put "tsflags=nodocs" in the yum.conf. Not sure how to > > get that up to spin-creation tools, and if we're going to count on it it > > could probably use some polish and integration. > > > >> info > > > > Yeah that goes along with nodocs. :) > > > > > > --nodocs and tsflags=nodocs ends up with ugly ugly things when you want to > do rpm -Va later. > > nodocs 'works' but not in a pretty way IIRC, the big problem we had with nodocs at Mandriva (MDV strip(s)(ped) docs from live images to save space) was that once you've installed a package without docs there's no easy way to add the docs, because the package is installed already, and there's no simple 'install all those docs that got left out' command. You can hack up some kind of icky duck-tape-and-string way of doing it, but unless things have changed since then, there's no straightforward way. So you're stuck without the docs for all the packages in the initial install. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
