Packaging/Review Guidelines change

[Panu Matilainen]

On Fri, 6 Jan 2006, Jeff Spaleta wrote:

> On 1/5/06, Tom 'spot' Callaway <tcallawa at redhat.com> wrote:
>> This is a policy that has been enforced for sometime, but never actually
>> added to the guidelines (until now).
>
>
> Just a thought.... how exactly are we expect as reviewers to check for this?
> Basically what this says is new package foo shouldn't own a
> pre-existing package called baz.
> Doesn't this effectively require a way to check the full package space
> in Core+Extras to see if a directory is own by a pre-existing package?
> Not just whatever we happen to have installed on the system we are
> doing the review on... but all fedora packages regardless of whether
> they are installed or not.  Can this be done with repoquery(which
> isn't working on rawhide systems at the  momment if i recall
> correctly) I'm not sure this "MUST" can be effectively reviewed or
> enforced as written, unless repoquery can be used to ask "what other
> packages in the tree own this directory"

You can do something like this:
repoquery `rpm -qpl <yourpackage>.rpm`

If you get any output, you have overlapping files/directories with those 
packages.

The CVS HEAD of yum-utils has repoquery which works on both FC4 and 
rawhide, we've been planning on doing a new release for some time now. 
I'll try to push things forward wrt that next week.

 	- Panu -