Fedora Core 1 Test Update: spamassassin-2.63-0.1
Ville Skyttä
ville.skytta at iki.fi
Wed Feb 11 20:17:51 UTC 2004
On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 12:18, Warren Togami wrote:
> <mschwendt> warren: that's why it is unfortunate that fedora.us packages
> must work around unowned directories by owning them. Creates problems
> like this.
Well, now that the newer perl packages finally own those dirs properly,
I think it'd be a good idea to stop the directory ownership bloating in
perl-* module packages, both for ones rolled for FC2+ _and_ earlier,
even though I do see the problem it creates for older distros whose perl
package does not own the vendor and friends dirs. The fedora.us QA
queue has lots of examples of perl-* packages that have been modified to
"reduce directory ownership bloat".
Recent rpm versions contain some new %{perl_*} variables which make this
easier.
While on the subject of perl directory ownership, IMO perl packages
should go one step further than just requiring their own versioned
vendor_perl and friends. They should own whatever they have in @INC:
perl -e 'print join("\n", @INC)'
That would make it possible to do working directory based dependencies
in module packages. If perl 5.8.7 is compatible with 5.8.6 and has the
5.8.6 vendor_perl and friends in @INC, the 5.8.7 package should create
and own both the relevant 5.8.6 and 5.8.7 dirs.
> Without Chip's suggestion of virtual Provides in place, what Requires
> line should go into this spamassassin FC1 update? Should we own the
> directories in spamassassin, like we do with fedora.us perl modules?
> Opinions please.
Maybe depend on the versioned perl binary?
Requires: %{_bindir}/perl%(eval "%{__perl} -V:version" ; echo $version)
More information about the fedora-test-list
mailing list