On 07/16/2013 06:01 PM, Till Maas wrote:
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 12:24:17PM +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Change Packaging Guidelines to discourage
requires into /bin and /sbin =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoBinDeps
== Scope ==
Proposal owners: None
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:32:15AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
libguestfs-tools-c-1:1.23.8-5.fc20.x86_64,/bin/vi
Fixed (in git). What I don't understand is why this didn't give a
broken dependency? I must have installed this package hundreds of
times on dozens of systems, and I've never seen
On 07/17/2013 02:14 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:32:15AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
libguestfs-tools-c-1:1.23.8-5.fc20.x86_64,/bin/vi
Fixed (in git). What I don't understand is why this didn't give a
broken dependency? I must have installed this package
Dne 17.7.2013 10:32, Florian Weimer napsal(a):
rubygem-apipie-rails-0.0.21-1.fc19.noarch,/bin/env
Seems to be dead code. I notified upstream about it:
https://github.com/Pajk/apipie-rails/issues/135
Vít
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Am 17.07.2013 14:14, schrieb Richard W.M. Jones:
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:32:15AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
libguestfs-tools-c-1:1.23.8-5.fc20.x86_64,/bin/vi
Fixed (in git). What I don't understand is why this didn't give a
broken dependency? I must have installed this package
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 12:24 +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Change Packaging Guidelines to discourage
requires into /bin and /sbin =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoBinDeps
Change owner(s): Ales Kozumplik a...@redhat.com
On the face of it, calling this
= Proposed System Wide Change: Change Packaging Guidelines to discourage
requires into /bin and /sbin =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoBinDeps
Change owner(s): Ales Kozumplik a...@redhat.com
Disallow dependencies on files under /bin, /sbin, /lib and /lib64.
== Detailed description
Sounds great.
But I think a lot of packages have relationship with icon cache need to be
updated. Do we need to fix it by automated script or let packagers finish?
Thanks.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Related FPC ticket [1]: FPC wanted this change to be created.
Oh really?
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/314
In that ticket I see one FPC member being for and two being against
the change.
Björn Persson
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
On 16. 7. 2013 at 13:57:02, Björn Persson wrote:
Related FPC ticket [1]: FPC wanted this change to be created.
Oh really?
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/314
In that ticket I see one FPC member being for and two being against
the change.
Yeah, the original message from Ales
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 12:24:17PM +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Change Packaging Guidelines to discourage
requires into /bin and /sbin =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoBinDeps
Change owner(s): Ales Kozumplik a...@redhat.com
Disallow dependencies
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 12:24:17PM +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: Change Packaging Guidelines to discourage
requires into /bin and /sbin =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoBinDeps
== Scope ==
Proposal owners: None
Other developers: replace all
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 04:46:26PM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
On 16. 7. 2013 at 13:57:02, Björn Persson wrote:
Related FPC ticket [1]: FPC wanted this change to be created.
Oh really?
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/314
In that ticket I see one FPC member being for and
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 09:25:37PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.07.2013 21:18, schrieb Toshio Kuratomi:
nod I think that the best course of action would to rethink UsrMove as
UsrMerge which I would then take to the rest of the FPC as getting rid of
the prohibition on packages
Once upon a time, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com said:
* Have package maintainers patch upstreams to use /usr/{bin,lib,[..]}
instead of /{bin,lib[...]} (for instance, shebang lines)
#!/bin/sh is the cannonical first line for a Bourne(-compatible) shell
script, and nothing should change
Am 16.07.2013 22:07, schrieb Toshio Kuratomi:
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 09:25:37PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.07.2013 21:18, schrieb Toshio Kuratomi:
nod I think that the best course of action would to rethink UsrMove as
UsrMerge which I would then take to the rest of the FPC as
Am 16.07.2013 22:18, schrieb Chris Adams:
Once upon a time, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com said:
* Have package maintainers patch upstreams to use /usr/{bin,lib,[..]}
instead of /{bin,lib[...]} (for instance, shebang lines)
#!/bin/sh is the cannonical first line for a
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 12:18 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
nod I think that the best course of action would to rethink UsrMove as
UsrMerge which I would then take to the rest of the FPC as getting rid of
the prohibition on packages listing /bin, /sbin/ lib, /lib64 as the location
in the file.
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
/bin/sh is *not* a bash script
/bin/sh is *whatever* your default shell would be
I certainly hope not. I've worked on plenty of Unix machines where
the default shell was csh or tcsh, but if /bin/sh had been csh or a
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 14:31 -0600, Eric Smith wrote:
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
/bin/sh is *not* a bash script
/bin/sh is *whatever* your default shell would be
I certainly hope not. I've worked on plenty of Unix machines where
the
Once upon a time, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net said:
Am 16.07.2013 22:18, schrieb Chris Adams:
#!/bin/sh is the cannonical first line for a Bourne(-compatible) shell
script, and nothing should change that. Even on other Unix OSes with a
/bin-/usr/bin symlink, all the shell scripts
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:22:01PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
/bin/sh is *not* a bash script
/bin/sh is *whatever* your default shell would be
Says who or what? I think we're _probably_ striving to be functionally
compatible with the Posix standard whereby 'sh' follows this specification:
I don't really appreciate the discussion this has started. All I had to
say about this is summed up here:
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/314#comment:7
From a position of someone who works on packaging tools and someone who
clashed with UsrMove several times already, this is my best shot
23 matches
Mail list logo
