[Bug 225237] Merge Review: acpid

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Merge Review: acpid


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225237


pknirsch at redhat.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|pknirsch at redhat.com         |kevin at tummy.com




------- Additional Comments From pknirsch at redhat.com  2007-02-08 07:05 EST -------
Hm. I've looked at other packages with logfiles in /var/log, and several
actually  owned those files:

pam: %ghost %verify(not md5 size mtime) /var/log/faillog
scrollkeeker: %ghost %{_localstatedir}/log/scrollkeeper.log
setup: %ghost %attr(0644,root,root) %verify(not md5 size mtime) /var/log/lastlog

So there are a few other examples where the logfile is at least being referenced
by a package using a %ghost entry.

I mean, it boils basically down to what files a package should own. And
typically (and historically) those consisted of the files that were clearly and
distinctly connected to that package. There could be the packaged files or, like
e.g. for /var/cache files created during the lifetime of a package on a system.
And imo /var/log/acpid is pretty clearly connected to one specific package,
namely acpid. ;)

Maybe this point should really be brought up at the next Fedora meeting to see
what the opinion of others are on it. The above is just my personal view after
maintaining packages for quite some time, but i'd have no problem if the general
rule would be to keep /var/log files unreferenced.

Read ya, Phil

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.