Re: introducing alternatives into a package

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On Wed, 2014-12-10 at 04:09 -0500, Jens Petersen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Alternatives explains how
> alternatives should be done in Fedora, however it does not seem to
> address the case of converting an existing package to use alternatives.
> 
> Specifically the problem arises when a file is changed to become a %ghost.
> It seems rpm keeps the old file around as a ghost and so update-alternatives
> does not create the new symlink.
> 
> I remember this happening when emacs introduced alternatives
> a good while back: at the time I worked around it just by removing
> emacs and reinstalling it.
> 
> Adding:
> 
> %pre
> if [ $1 -gt 1 ] ; then
>   if [ -f %{_bindir}/%{name} -a ! -L %{_bindir}/%{name} ]; then
>       rm %{_bindir}/%{name}
>   fi
> fi
> 
> seems to be one way to handle this.
> 
> Is there any better way to do this or is the above solution good enough?
> 
> If so maybe I should ask FPC about updating Packaging:Alternatives to
> include this.  (I kind of wish these kind of idioms would be defined
> as rpm macros.)
> 
> Jens

I'm CCing this to the packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx mailing list, as
you're more likely to get a useful response from there.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite Forum]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux