Am 17.03.21 um 16:47 schrieb Kevin Fenzi:
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 10:25:24AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
Does Fedora has any policies regarding editing or replacing (say with
symbolic links) of configuration files owned by another package? That
is, automatically on system or package installation, and not as a tool
that system administrators run explicitly to make changes to those
files.
I don't see anything explicit. There's:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_file_and_directory_ownership
which talks about a package owning all it's files, but it doesn't
explicitly say no to this.
That said, IMHO this should be forbidden.
Whats the use case?
It maybe not Florians use-case, but we may have a similar situation on
pinephone:
fedora-release-common-32-4.noarch owns /etc/os-release
our spin should identify itself as "XXXXXX" via variant_id added to
os-release.
3 Ways:
1) contacting the package owner, and ask for his help on this case.
2) a replacement package with a changed version of os-release is stored
into copr ( higher priority )
3) a helper package post-script adds the needed line to os-release if
not present (*USE-CASE here* )
Whats actually the best way to deal with it?
Best regards,
Marius
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
