Re: yum update failed today with....

2012-04-25 Thread Jonathan Kamens
That would seem to be an issue with the google-chrome-unstable RPM, 
which almost certainly should not package /usr/bin. Since that RPM is 
provided by Google, not by Fedora, you need to take it up with them.


  jik

On 4/25/2012 12:40 PM, Kevin Martin wrote:

Transaction Check Error:
   file /usr/bin from install of 
google-chrome-unstable-20.0.1115.1-133713.x86_64 conflicts with file from 
package
filesystem-3.1-1.fc18.x86_64

Kevin

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: yum update failed today with....

2012-04-25 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com said:
 Transaction Check Error:
   file /usr/bin from install of 
 google-chrome-unstable-20.0.1115.1-133713.x86_64 conflicts with file from 
 package
 filesystem-3.1-1.fc18.x86_64

It looks like a bunch of the common directories have been changed to
read-only in the filesystem package (haven't seen any notice/discussion
about that, but maybe I missed it).

The other issue would be: why is google-chrome-unstable (wherever you
are getting that from) packaing the /usr/bin directory?  It shouldn't do
that.

-- 
Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: yum update failed today with....

2012-04-25 Thread Dennis Gilmore
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 12:51:49 -0400
Jonathan Kamens j...@kamens.us wrote:

 On 4/25/2012 12:47 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
  Isn't it common to also include the directories you want to place
  files into?
 
  $ rpm -ql google-chrome-stable | grep /bin
  /usr/bin
  /usr/bin/google-chrome
 No. This is not correct packaging.
 
 It is reasonable for an RPM to /require /the presence of the system 
 directories it uses as prerequisites before it can be installed, so
 that if the filesystem layout changes in a way that the RPM doesn't
 expect, it will refuse to install (which is correct behavior).
 
 It is /not/ reasonable for an RPM to /include/ shared directories
 that it does not own. Files and directories should only be owned by a
 single RPM.
 
 On my system, there are only four RPMs (out of 3616) that provide 
 /usr/bin: VirtualBox, filesystem, google-earth-stable, and 
 google-chrome-stable. It is telling that three of these four RPMs are 
 third-party RPMs. Their maintainers are shipping buggy RPMs and they 
 should fix them.
 
 This is generally a sign that they were lazy when writing their spec 
 files... Instead of constructing the %files section of the spec file 
 carefully to include only the files they actually own, they just put
 * in the spec file to include the entire contents of the install 
 directory. Yuck.

actually a * would have been preferable  what they would have used is
%{_bindir}  they should have done %{_bindir}/* so they own whats in
there but not the directory itself if they jsut used something like /*
they would also own /usr  but its very buggy packaging.

Dennis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk+YLmcACgkQkSxm47BaWffNfACfSuDzONlsYnujBTTbe2+A6hC8
1PIAnA9hqYry5AwnvbkEngNJJ+LL+QKY
=+FIa
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: yum update failed today with....

2012-04-25 Thread Adam Williamson
On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 12:47 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote:

 Isn't it common to also include the directories you want to place files into?

Only when there's any real chance of them not existing otherwise. I'd
say packaging any directory which is part of FHS is a clear error.
Packaging a directory is essentially to assert ownership of it. You can
read it as meaning 'if this package is not installed, this directory
should not exist'. That's a good test of whether you should be packaging
any given directory: does that statement make sense?
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: yum update failed today with....

2012-04-25 Thread Panu Matilainen

On 04/25/2012 07:45 PM, Chris Adams wrote:

Once upon a time, Kevin Martinktm...@gmail.com  said:

Transaction Check Error:
   file /usr/bin from install of 
google-chrome-unstable-20.0.1115.1-133713.x86_64 conflicts with file from 
package
filesystem-3.1-1.fc18.x86_64


It looks like a bunch of the common directories have been changed to
read-only in the filesystem package (haven't seen any notice/discussion
about that, but maybe I missed it).


The permission difference might've been there forever, rpm has only very 
recently (in rawhide) started to raise file conflicts when 
user/group/mode differences.




The other issue would be: why is google-chrome-unstable (wherever you
are getting that from) packaing the /usr/bin directory?  It shouldn't do
that.


Yup, its a packaging bug in google-chrome.

- Panu -

--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: yum update failed today with....

2012-04-25 Thread Jon Ciesla
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Panu Matilainen
pmati...@laiskiainen.org wrote:
 On 04/25/2012 07:45 PM, Chris Adams wrote:

 Once upon a time, Kevin Martinktm...@gmail.com  said:

 Transaction Check Error:
   file /usr/bin from install of
 google-chrome-unstable-20.0.1115.1-133713.x86_64 conflicts with file from
 package
 filesystem-3.1-1.fc18.x86_64


 It looks like a bunch of the common directories have been changed to
 read-only in the filesystem package (haven't seen any notice/discussion
 about that, but maybe I missed it).


 The permission difference might've been there forever, rpm has only very
 recently (in rawhide) started to raise file conflicts when user/group/mode
 differences.


 The other issue would be: why is google-chrome-unstable (wherever you
 are getting that from) packaing the /usr/bin directory?  It shouldn't do
 that.


 Yup, its a packaging bug in google-chrome.

gasp

What?  That's unpossible!

-J

        - Panu -

 --
 test mailing list
 test@lists.fedoraproject.org
 To unsubscribe:
 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test



-- 
http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/

in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test