On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:16:09 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 06:51:57 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > > >> Michael Schwendt wrote: > > >> > Making a file %ghost, when multiple packages use the alternatives > >> > system for a shared set of paths, would be wrong. > > >> I disagree, I've done it, and it works just fine. I've advocated that > >> all alternatives-using-packages (particularly jpackage ones) use this > >> technique. > > > Now you've got N packages which pretend they own a file/symlink. > > That's as it should be, imo. You would rather the file/symlink be unowned? But sure! The link target does not belong into any package, since it is a configuration value. E.g. $ rpm -qf /etc/alternatives/mta file /etc/alternatives/mta is not owned by any package If packages PKG1 and PKG2 own the link name, none of them owns the link target. And since the link target is a link itself, only either one can own the configured file the final link points to. Hence if the final destination is a file in PKG2, it would be wrong to make PKG1 the owner of the base link. > > The alternatives symlink is a configuration value and doesn't belong into > > any package. The admin could also point the symlink to something in > > /usr/local, and you don't want to remove his customisation when an rpm is > > uninstalled. > > Stuff done outside of rpm is done by a local admin at their own risk. Too bad, since the "alternatives" system is a configuration system outside of RPM: rpm -qf /etc/alternatives/* /var/lib/alternatives/* man alternatives -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
