https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1360199 --- Comment #8 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Zygmunt Krynicki from comment #5) > (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #2) > > I'd probably suggest that you need to tweak things slightly. > > > > Fedora policy indicates that while private libs can go into > > %{_libdir}/snapd, helper programs and such should be in %{_libexecdir}/snapd > > (though %{_libdir}/snapd is allowed if it's not possible to make it work in > > the preferred path). In Fedora, %{_libexecdir} is defined as /usr/libexec. > > See the relevant macros for paths here: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:RPMMacros > > I think that *right now* it is irrelevant where snap-confine is, later on > snapd will just have to agree as snapd and snap-confine. In other > distributions this is done by installing everything to /usr/lib/snapd/*. If > that cannot be done due to Fedora policy then it can be anything else as > long as the snapd package just agrees on the effective location. > > > Relevant guidelines on libexecdir: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Libexecdir > > > > I suspect that your --libdir is really supposed to be a --libexecdir, since > > I doubt you're interfacing with snap-confine via a C library to snapd. > > Yes. Let me tweak this. Thanks for spotting this. I bet it just works > because there are no actual libraries and libdir implies setting libexecdir This stuff is important because the usage of libexecdir automatically marks a package as not multilib safe, which is important for preventing weird things happening when we create the x86_64 repository with multilib support. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx