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

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: one more draft



On Sunday 23 March 2008, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 06:26:35PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > On Friday 21 March 2008, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> > > I've added another draft to the todo list:
> > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/NoBitsInSrv
> > >
> > > I doubt we'll get to it on Tuesday, but we'll get to it eventually.
> >
> > If this passes, it needs a statement what to do with packages that
> > already use /srv in a way that conflicts with the draft.  /srv/foo is
> > typically data, potentially lots and lots of it, so auto-migrations are
> > practically out of the question and manual ones are possibly nontrivial
> > amounts of admin work. Therefore I'd suggest letting them stay as is.
>
> Which packages are these?

vdr (maintained by yours truly) is one.  There's easily tens or hundreds of 
gigabytes of DVB recordings in /srv/vdr.

> Maybe they can check whether they are being 
> upgraded (from a package evr polluting /srv) or freshly installed. In the
> latter case they should behave as every other package, e.g. not assume
> anything about /srv.

I suppose that's possible (didn't think of that, thanks), but will lead to 
more or less fragile config file modifications in scriptlets.  I'm leaning on 
the side of calling these modifications uglier than just leaving the data 
where it is in /srv especially because there's no certainty how this issue 
will be treated in the future (the draft contains things like "unclear" 
and "At this time").


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