On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 12:12 PM Stephen Smoogen <ssmoogen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Or they will just do what I used to do long ago and just do a temp spec file with some sort of `%files *` and then rpm -ql and then `rpm -ql | sed` and replace the data in the pushed spec with the list. Nothing is caught because few people have time for the several hundred packages they are maintaining. As I recall(*), there are spec files that just find the various installed files (categorized as needed), and then use the -f option on the %files section. Which, technically, meets the requirements, while not dealing with the intent at all. I think this is really a question of scale. For smaller packages with a small number of expected files, listing them explicitly is going to be a smaller burden to add or maintain, but for larger packages (arguably exactly the ones that are more likely to "stomp" on other files and you want to catch changes for), the work is likely much higher (to the point that one adds in automation to hide the work). (*) I think glibc is an example, but it has been some time since I looked. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
