On 02/09/2014 02:32 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 9:16 AM, John Morris <john@xxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > Right now, a "sample-configs" directory is installed into > ${prefix}/share/doc/linuxcnc/examples. > > This is a typical pattern, at first glance, but it turns out that the > GUIs actually present these as base configurations to users, and do bad > things when they are not present. > > The Fedora Packaging Guidelines are clear that these files must not be > marked as %doc [1]. However, neither source I found for documentation > packaging [1,2] said clearly whether files not marked as %doc are > allowed in %{_defaultdocdir}/%{name}-%{version} (and neither mentions > that fc20 doc dirs seem to be unversioned). > > > I think the ultimate arbiter is whether (rpm -Uvh --excludedocs > $that_package) will install the files or not. --excludedocs is what the > users are supposed to be using to install without documentation, not (rm > -rf /usr/share/doc $and_a_dozen_of_other_paths). I'm having trouble with this. To rephrase your reply, as I understand it: The arbiter of whether Fedora Packaging Guidelines allows non-%doc files to be installed in /usr/share/doc and other locations [like what?] is whether or not '--excludedocs' will install the files. I imagine the '--excludedocs' argument does not affect files *not* marked as %doc, even if installed in /usr/share/doc. Could you mean that, non-%doc files would be installed there despite '--excludedocs' is a violation of Guidelines? Restating the question [omitted in the reply]: By Fedora Packaging Guidelines, are runtime-dependent files (*not* marked as %doc, of course!) allowed in %{_defaultdocdir}/%{name}-%{version}? John -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
