Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Tuesday 11 March 2008, Warren Togami wrote:
Furthermore I wonder if there should be any rule or suggestion of how
install-info should be used within a %post scriptlet. I see some
packages redirect the output of install-info to /dev/null, and
install-info's man page also describes a --quiet option. Might we
recommend in guidelines the use of this to suppress the warning that
happens when a package is installed with --excludedocs?
install-info's --quiet does not suppress errors resulting from files not
found.
Redirecting stderr to /dev/null sounds a bit draconian to me; testing whether
the info file exists before invoking install-info would be somewhat better.
But the somewhat annoying part of that is that currently we'd need to test if
the gzipped info file exists which is hardcoding assumptions about what
happens under the hood outside of the specfile's control into the specfile
(would break if the system rpm is configured to not compress info files at
all or use something else than gzip for compressing them) instead of just
invoking install-info (without the .gz suffix! install-info handles that
internally) on the target info file.
So I suppose the recommended way would call for a macro, let's say
%install_info foo
...which would expand into something like (%1=foo):
for suf in .gz .bz2 "" ; do # + other suffixes auto-handled by install-info
if [ -f %{_infodir}/%1.info$suf ] ; then
/sbin/install-info %{_infodir}/$1.info %{_infodir}/dir || :
break
fi
done
...and a similar one that does install-info --delete for removing it.
If we start introducing macro's for common scriplets (which I'm in favor of)
can we then please check how they are called in suse / mandrake and try to use
the same names to make spec file sharing easier?
Regards.
Hans
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
