On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:52 AM Stephen John Smoogen <smo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 10:19, Tom Hughes via devel > <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: >> >> I don't see how this is FHS compliant, which in turn would make >> it non-compliant with Fedora Packaging Guidelines, namely: >> > > > I am in agreement here and think that this is NOT a change to be made in F36 > but needs to be worked through the proper channels of 'upstream'. Get the FHS > updated and fixed, work out that the change actually is going to be stuck to > in SuSE and not rolled back and then push it to Fedora.
It's actually /usr/lib not /usr that applies here. https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs/ch04s06.html And it's been worked through proper upstream channels for 4+ years. Location http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2017-October/006722.html FHS question http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2017-October/006697.html There's a bunch of back and forth throughout. The rpmdb isn't really variable data. It's static data that describes other static data. -- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ 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
