On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 06:32 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-07-23 at 17:25 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > >> On Sun, 2006-07-23 at 23:17 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I'm reviewing a package where the license file is under %{_datadir} > >>> beacuse the gtk GUI needs to display it. Moving it to %doc is bad as > >>> the application would be dependent on %doc content. But not having it > >>> in %doc is bad, too, as this is the canonical place someone will query > >>> the license text. > >>> > >>> IMHO in this case it should be doubled. Do you agree? > >> I don't see a problem with duplicating it but is there any problem with > >> a symlink from %_datadir to the docdir? > > Yes, > > > > - they could be on different partitions, so symlinks might not be > > available. > > Why not? Because I mixed up hard and soft links ;) Sorry. > > - A file under %{_datadir]/<somewhere> is application data, not rpm > > %doc'umentation. Though the files might be identical, they are > > completely different beasts. > > So? Data is "used by" relation. Documentation is a "has a" relation. > > - rpm --excludedocs (i.e. if symlinking, then the physical copy must be > > in %{_datadir} and the symlink in %docdir. > > As long as both are marked %doc, there shouldn't be a problem. If %{_datadir}/<something>/COPYING is used by a package, it's data, not documentation. %doc'ing it would be a fault. Ralf -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging