On Fri, 2013-08-23 at 17:12 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 02:28:23PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Fri, 2013-08-23 at 23:15 +0200, Michael Scherer wrote: > > > > So anyway - I think we need some best practice on this. We definitely > > need a 'if you absolutely must change a directory into a symlink (or a > > file, or the same operations in the other direction), here's how you do > > it' snippet set. If folks could chip in with thoughts on misc's approach > > to doing this, that'd be great: Panu, do you see any problems? Know a > > better way? I tried the giant-lump-of-lua from > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/rpm/+bug/633636/comments/3 , but it throws a > > bunch of warnings when cleanup of the *old* package tries to remove all > > the files that are now no longer there, which is bad, and misc thinks > > it's bad in other ways, I believe. There are various other attempts to > > do this kind of operation spread through various packages in Fedora and > > out - moodle has some, for instance, xmvn has one, there are others I > > think that I don't have to hand right now. > > > +1 I was going to see if limburgher would push his recipe into an FPC > guideline but it seems that that method no longer works reliably. it'll be > interesting to hear what Panu says here but I think the FPC could live with > the caveats if it had to. > > > And, T.C., we probably need the Web Assets policy to set some > > rules/guidelines on how best to achieve unbundling: should we always try > > to patch the upstream to find the 'official' location of the shared > > resource on Fedora? Should we always do it with symlinks or aliases > > where possible? Should we allow either approach depending on > > circumstances? > > > One further thought here: > https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging:JavaScript#Static_Inclusion_of_Libraries > > Taking a static library approach is also allowed. This can save packagers > from some of the headaches you mentioned (like some things detecting the > absolute path to libraries) but introduces the static libraries headaches > (having to rebuild when the library package updates in order to get the > changes that occurred there.) Not sure if we want to recommend that just to > get around the directory->symlink issue but it is an option. Using the system copy really would be a lot cleaner, in some cases - I'd really hope we can do it and not have to resort to static inclusion :/ -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
