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

Re: Packaging/Review Guidelines change



On 01/05/2006 09:38 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


"Nicolas" == Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas mailhot laposte net> writes:


Nicolas> Le jeudi 05 janvier 2006 à 14:42 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway a
Nicolas> écrit :


The only exception case is where two packages use the same
directory structure (outside of the FHS), but neither relies on the
other one (aka, either one could be installed first, or without the
other). Then, and only then, its acceptable for both packages to
own the directory, as they both have the potential to be
"first". This is a corner case, though.


Nicolas> Sure it's a corner case. But the devil is in the details, so
Nicolas> it needs to be documented (more than the usual case which
Nicolas> almost no one gets wrong nowadays)

An example I have of this is the munin package.
There is a main 'munin' package that is only installed on a collector
machine, and then a 'munin-node' subpackage thats installed on all the
nodes you want to monitor. Either one or both could be installed on
any given machine. They both use /var/lib/munin/ to store state and
/var/log/munin/ to store logs. So, they both need to own those directories.
One thing worth noting in this case is that both packages should have
the same permissions and ownership. Otherwise the last package
installed will override the previous package, possibly leading to
maddness and chaos. :)

I have been hit by this. Here's bugzilla:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176529

Regards,
Dariusz

		
___________________________________________________________ NEW Yahoo! Cars - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online! http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/


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