Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=924310 --- Comment #11 from Alex G. <mr.nuke.me@xxxxxxxxx> --- > > > > > %{_datadir}/MateConf/gsettings/atril.convert > > > > Missing "Requires: mate-conf" > Mate-conf is obsolete. MATE is complete ported to gsettings started with > 1.5.x package versions. > After i removed mate-conf from my latest compiz packages i expected Dan > Marchal (MATE Maintainer) will obsolete mate-conf too, like he did it with > other obsolete MATE packages for f19. > In fedora MATE started with 1.5.x versions, all of them didn't use mate-conf > anymore, in result there is no user who have mate-conf settings to convert. Well, then why are we putting data in /usr/share/MateConf, which is owned by mate-conf ? Someone needs to own that dir. $ yum provides /usr/share/MateConf mate-conf-1.4.0-21.fc18.x86_64 : MATE Desktop configuration tool Repo : fedora Matched from: Filename : /usr/share/MateConf > > ============================================================================= > > === > > [!]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. > > > %{_datadir}/doc/mate/atril/atril.html > > > %{_datadir}/doc/mate/atril/atril_start_window.png > > > > These look like innocent documentation. You should include them with %doc. > > otherwise, you end up with both mate/ and mate-document-viewer/ in > > /usr/share/doc. > So i can use > %doc README COPYING NEWS AUTHORS atril.html atril_start_window.png > ???? > Or what do you suggest? Can you explain it more detail please? Ok. This is more complicated. The package installer thinks that it is a good idea to install documentaion in /usr/share/doc/. The location of the doc is packaging territory, and upstream should not really mess with that. I would contact them about it. Until then, we can mess around a little bit: in %install, add: # move installed doc to versioned directory mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_docdir}/mate \ $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version} then change the %files entry to: %doc %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/atril/atril.html %doc %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/atril/atril_start_window.png > > > > ============================================================================= > > === > > [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. > > > > > %{_datadir}/mate/help/atril/ > > $ yum provides /usr/share/mate > > No Matches found > > > > Who owns %{_datadir}/mate/ and %{_datadir}/mate/atril/ ? > %{_datadir}/mate/ should owned by mate-desktop, because this is the major > and first package in MATE. Also the build order for MATE is mate-common, > mate-doc-utils, mate-desktop and then the rest. > But i noticed it isn't. And none of those packages owns %{_datadir}/mate/. It seems mate-doc-utils is the the first package to create this directory, but does not own it. We will need to have a bug created against that, and set it as a blocker to this bug. > > > %{_libdir}/caja/extensions-2.0/libatril-properties-page.so > > $ yum provides /usr/lib64/caja/ > > No Matches found > > $ yum provides /usr/lib/caja/ > > No Matches found > Caja is the internal name, the package name is mate-file-manager. > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/mate-file-manager.git/tree/mate-file- > manager.spec > Maybe the same prob here, i think %{_libdir}/caja/extensions-2.0 should also > own %{_libdir}/caja ??? Another bug against mate-file-manager telling them they do not own all the dirs they create. > > ... > > mate-document-viewer-libs.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency > I did try to fix this with > # remove unused-direct-shlib-dependency > sed -i -e 's! -shared ! -Wl,--as-needed\0!g' libtool > Do you know a other solution? I think this is just a false positive. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=aswsEzJgKu&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review