On 16. 01. 23 18:13, Björn Persson wrote:
Miro Hrončok wrote:
Or is
the "this is RPM, it's always going to be there" argument stronger than the
rules? Is RPM actually always guaranteed to be there?
Well, if RPM somehow isn't there, does it still matter whether a
directory is owned by any RPM package? What does it even mean for an
RPM package to own a directory when there is no RPM keeping track of
that ownership?
Well, I thought about that as well. What if the RPM that installs/manages the
packages is executed from outside of a chroot/mock/nspawn thing?
See this:
$ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 init
...
$ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --remove rpm
...
$ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --dnf-cmd repoquery --installed -f
/usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.dist
...
fedora-release-common-0:38-0.15.noarch
...
$ mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --dnf-cmd repoquery --installed -f
/usr/lib/rpm/macros.d
...
(no package listed)
...
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
