On Thu, 18.07.13 14:23, Vít Ondruch (vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > Dne 18.7.2013 14:19, Lennart Poettering napsal(a): > >On Thu, 18.07.13 10:34, Vít Ondruch (vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > > >>Dne 18.7.2013 01:02, Lennart Poettering napsal(a): > >>>So, maybe, instead of dropping the "Provides syslog" thing from > >>>journald, maybe we should add an explicit "syslog-files" dependency (or > >>>something named like that) and then make the classic syslog > >>>implementations provide that and the packages which actually need > >>>/var/log/messages pull that it? > >>> > >>>Lennart > >>> > >>So why there are files in /var/log and there is not obvious package, > >>which creates them (unless you want to guess by name)? Shouldn't all > >>package, which creates log in /var/log have some virtual provide to > >>make it obvious? Why not do it properly/consistently? > >So, you suggest using "Requires: /var/log/messages" and "Provides: > >/var/log/messages" as indication for this, and the %ghost > >/var/log/messages in the packages in question? > > > >Sounds good to me! Matthew? > > > >Lennart > > > > I would suggest it, but it is not recommended by guidelines :( so I > suggest some (not yet) standardized virtual provide, which will be > more descriptive than "syslog-files" > > Vít > > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Dependencies I guess this comment doesn't apply if we explicitly add Provides: /var/log/messages to all packages that provide the file. Hmm, or maybe no, I don't grok RPM well enough... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
