Jan Pazdziora wrote: > > Hello, > > the page > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tmpfiles.d > > suggests to specify /run/%{name}/ directories and files in %files and > then says > > Files placed in the subdirectories may be listed the same way > or omitted entirely as the files will be cleaned up on every > reboot. > > I assume it talks about subdirectories of that /run/%{name}/. > > However, how about subdirectories like /run/lock/%{name}/ ? > > In Fedora base container images, the /run is empty. So when you try to > do > > FROM fedora:23 > RUN dnf install -y package-which-puts-something-to-run-lock > > it will fail because there is no /run/lock there. An example is > opencryptoki and > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341079 > > What is the policy about specifying /run/lock/ (and in general > /run/otherdirs/) subdirectories in %files? > > Could the guideline be amended to explicitly say that anything under > /run/ which is not under /run/%{name}/ should not be listed in %files? I've always been of the firm opinion that in general all files should be "owned", e.g. that rpm -q -f /path/too/foo can tell you the owner. So, I would argue against the amendment you suggest. Offhand, what seems to be the real problem here is the lack of /run/lock in the container images. I'd consider that a bug worth fixing. Is that not possible? -- Rex -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
