Ville Skyttä (ville.skytta@xxxxxx) said: > > > excludedocs isn't the only thing that should be addressed. There's also > > > at least read-only (%_netsharedpath) /usr/share, and --excludepath. > > > > If you change %_netsharedpath and/or --excludepath, you get to keep > > all the pieces, much like if you do forced relocation. Those aren't > > supportable, generally. > > I don't see why %_netsharedpath wouldn't be supportable, pretty much all it > takes from the packager is to not expect that writes from scriptlets will > always succeed (in the sense that the scriptlet won't end up terminating the > transaction). Because it allows you to set arbitrary paths that can't be known to the packager as writable, there's no sane way to write scriptlets. For --excludedocs, the packager knows ahead of time what parts of his package will be affected, and can write their scripts accordingly. For %_netsharedpath, it could be any portion of the package that could change to be unwritable out from under the package. If it's /usr/lib, should it be OK if ldconfig fails? If it's /etc/init.d, is it OK if chkconfig fails? You can't reliably package around arbitrary restrictions. Bill -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
