On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 11:21:41PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > rpmlint spits symlink-should-be-relative warnings when it sees an > absolute symlink, and generally folks have fixed things up when > presented with the warning. what is the rationale behind preferring relative to absolute symlinks (unless relative means in the same folder)? I would even prefer it the other way around to avoid breakage. > But now I've hit a review where the packager thinks an absolute > symlink is appropriate and I'm not sure whether it's really an > issue. The guidelines are silent on the subject; the only mention I > see of it is in the mono guidelines, which say: > > ---- > Mono installs binaries in /usr/lib/<package>/bin with symlinks back to > /usr/bin. rpmlint is not happy with this and generates an error (which > is the correct behaviour). > ---- > > That statement is somewhat confusing; is generating the error correct > behavior? Is the symlink supposed to be fixed up or not? And does > this apply in general to non-mono packages? > > - J< > -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgppZ3Z94CyG5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
