[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Fedora-packaging] review guidelines vs packaging guidelines



Hello,

On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 09:11:10AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> New clarified language.  Packaging Guidelines:
> '''
> In general, your package should own all of the directories that it
> creates but the situation is more complex than in the case of files
> because many packages put files into the same directories.

the second half of the sentence really confuses me.
I suggest to put period after "creates".

> The rule of
> thumb is that your package should own all of the directories it creates

repeated again?

> except those owned by packages which your package depends on.

ok

> *However, there are times when you should own more than this.*

Again, this puzzles me.  I would say:
"In certain situations, a directory may be owned by two packages.
Typically, more than one package has files in a common directory, but
none of them requires another of them--in that case, each of them
shall own the directory."

> If the directory
> hierarchy your package is located in may change due to updates of
> packages you depend on, then you need to take care to own those pieces
> of the hierarchy.

This might be correct, but I'm not able to decipher it; perhaps I
have not encountered such a situation yet.

> [snip examples]
> 
> In any case, there should never be any unowned directories after a
> package is uninstalled from the system.

Again, I would rephrase. Something like:
"In any case, a system may never contain a file owned by an installed
package whoch would lay below an unowned directory.
(That's because such a directory would remain on the system after the
corresponding package has been removed.)"

I hope my comments help.

Have a nice day,
	Stepan


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]