On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 10:13:25AM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > On 08/06/2009 10:09 AM, Rex Dieter wrote: >> It would seem an enterprising contributor has taken it upon themselves >> to mass-file bugs wrt installing packages using --excludedocs. Problem >> being that many of these bugs are about scriptlet output, like, in >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=515925 >> >> install-info: No such file or directory for /usr/share/info/pinentry.info >> >> which follows our current guidlines, >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Texinfo >> >> and is not fatal to the transaction. >> >> Should the guideline be changed to suppress the erroneous output, or >> checks added (as suggested in the aforementioned bug), like >> [ -f %{_infodir}/pinentry.info ] && ... > > Well, if there is output that we wouldn't want suppressed, we could do > the file check, but I'm wondering how much of a slow down it would be to > check for that file several hundred times in a large transaction. Isn't this file checked only once by the package that provides it? Also when it comes to info and tuning rpm to insanity one would even need to know whether it is pinentry.info or pinentry.info.gz (automatically gzipped by rpm during packaging up the file unless tuned not to). I think install-info happily takes pinentry.info as an argument and still operates on pinentry.info.gz, so the file check would need to check for both variants. E.g. I think it is better to ">/dev/null 2>&1 || :" in this case -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpq7xJsL6DZh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
