On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 10:47:36AM +0100, Jarek Prokop via packaging wrote: > Hi, > > recently we were faced with a bug that caused an infinite loop in a > container. It was from a package (node.js) retaining a scriptlet to replace > a directory as recommended in Fedora Guidelines [0]. > Thoughts? Feedback? Let's take a step back. Does it make sense to implement complicated and fragile scriptlets in packages? Or even: will packagers remember to check if the package update they are doing replaces directories by symlinks or vice versa and remember to add the complicated scriptlet? The answer to the second question is no: quite naturally we forget about this all the time, and only add the scriptlet when somebody reports an rpm transaction error. The answer to the first question is more subjective, but IMO, it's also "no". Can we *please* get rid of this footgun that has been a continous source of problems? We are making efforts to move away from scriptlets in packaging. With the ongoing sysusers change we managed to absorb a significant percentage of complex scriptlets into rpm. Let's do the same with the directory/symlink replacement scriptlets: let rpm do the rename to '.rpmmoved' if it detects a type mismatch. The end result will be _exactly_ the same as if we had the scriptlet in the package, but it'll only be implemented once. Zbyszek -- _______________________________________________ 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
