On 25 April 2017 at 01:16, Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > But for small packages which have not so many translatable > messages producing dozens of small RPMs ~1 kilobyte each or even > less would doesn't sound like a good solution. So I suggest to > introduce this feature but not globally and obligatorily for > all packages. > > Additionally, I think that for some purposes installing all > languages for some specific applications would be useful so > I also suggest providing something like glibc-all-langpacks. So you guys want to say that you never heard that in %files is possible to add %lang(<language>) tokens and when you will put in /etc/rpm/rpmrc line: %_install_langs <lang1>[,<lang2>,[..]] or %_install_langs all you evey install new or upgrade existing package will cause that only resources marked in %files by exact %lang() tokens will be installed? ??? And you never heard about this possibility to add %packages section name param like: %packages --instLangs <lang1>[,<lang2>,[..]] by which you initial installation using anaconda installed will be done only with installed files marked only exact languages tokens? Really? I'm really disappointed as I'm personally contributed more than 10 years ago some parts in find-lang.sh script which is behind %find_lang macro which simplifies adding %lang() tokens to some well known classes of files which may be a part of some packages. Looks as well like some people never heard that in %files section is possible to add %doc tokens and by this possible to choose install system without installed documentation (and this is why this overkill with doc packages already happens). Installation with documentation exclusion is fully supported by rpm, dff and anaconda installer as well. kloczek -- Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
