On Tue, 2006-06-06 at 20:04 +0100, Jose Pedro Oliveira wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Toshio, > [SNIP] > > Additionally, the %ghost trick used for both vim and emacs cleanup will > > cause double ownership of directories which spot says is not just > > deprecated but a blocker. > > Sorry but I disagree. Even (or better when) if rpm can remove > packages in the correct order there are situations you can't > avoid having two or more packages owning the same directory > (for good examples check packages in the perl namespace). The only time we're permitting duplicate directory ownership is when there is not a clear dependency tree: Package A uses /usr/foo to store files Package B uses /usr/foo to store files Neither package relies on anything that creates /usr/foo, and either package can be installed independently. Then, and ONLY then can both packages own /usr/foo. ~spot -- Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Senior Sales Engineer || GPG ID: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my! -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
