On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 14:51:02 -0800, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 2009-02-28 at 12:26 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > > When updating today I noticed that /usr/lib/ghc-6.10.1/package.conf was not > > updated, but rather a .rpmnew file was created. I took a look at > > /usr/lib/ghc-6.10.1/package.conf and it doesn't look like a normal conf > > file (that one might edit by hand). > > My guess is that either it shouldn't be getting treated like a conf file > > (and hence just be replaced) or the file should be in /etc not /lib. > > Since I am not familiar with how this is used, I figured I'd run it by > > here first before filing a bug. > > I believe it shouldn't be considered a configuration file, if I were you > I'd file a bug on the package suggesting it not be marked as such. OK, when I get a bit more caught up on stuff I file a bug commenting on it. I saw there was at least one more config file in /lib. Once I actually get updated after the mass rebuild, I'll search for *.rpmnew in /lib and look at filing some bugs. -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
