https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #9 from Simone Caronni <negativo17@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to comment #6) > I am trying to not mess with upstream install. In that case it would be > required to rm -fr the docs subdir from buildroot in %install. > > Would it be ok to add a symlink? For example: > > ln -s %{_datadir}/megaglest/docs %{buildroot}%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version} Well, unless the game requires at runtime to access its docs (an ingame menu, or something like that) marking them as docs and leave rpmbuild do its things (i.e. put everything in %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}) is not a problem. You cannot do the link, but what you did is ok, only it does the thing half way, when installed it ends up like this: %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/docs/<files> In my opinion should be better "%doc %{_datadir}/megaglest/docs/*" as it will end up like this: %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/<files> thus removing the docs subdirectory in the document directory. Otherwise is ok. (In reply to comment #7) > BTW, the docs subdir is also, kind of shared with the arch specific megaglest > package, so, megaglest must require megaglest-data. You could create a megaglest-docs subpackage if you want. And if the main megaglest has again the license file is ok to leave it in both packages, as that is part of the guidelines to leave the license everywhere, i.e: /usr/share/doc/megaglest-3.6.0.3/license.txt /usr/share/doc/megaglest-data-3.6.0.3/license.txt (In reply to comment #8) > Only did not properly address the megaglest-data requires back megaglest as I > am not sure how to make a requires of a arch specific package from a noarch > one (should just work as "Requires: megaglest" I guess...) You can't do that, but the generic one it's not a problem as it should work anyway, yum will first pick the same arch version if available and then the next one. I'm waiting to put "package approved" on this just because I want to review also megaglest. Thanks, --Simone -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review