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

Re: [Fedora-packaging] COPYING (license) not under docdir



On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 06:32 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-07-23 at 17:25 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> >> On Sun, 2006-07-23 at 23:17 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I'm reviewing a package where the license file is under %{_datadir}
> >>> beacuse the gtk GUI needs to display it. Moving it to %doc is bad as
> >>> the application would be dependent on %doc content. But not having it
> >>> in %doc is bad, too, as this is the canonical place someone will query
> >>> the license text.
> >>>
> >>> IMHO in this case it should be doubled. Do you agree?
> >> I don't see a problem with duplicating it but is there any problem with
> >> a symlink from %_datadir to the docdir?
> > Yes,
> > 
> > - they could be on different partitions, so symlinks might not be
> > available.
> 
> Why not?
Because I mixed up hard and soft links ;) Sorry.

> > - A file under %{_datadir]/<somewhere> is application data, not rpm
> > %doc'umentation. Though the files might be identical, they are
> > completely different beasts.
> 
> So?

Data is "used by" relation.
Documentation is a "has a" relation.

> > - rpm --excludedocs (i.e. if symlinking, then the physical copy must be
> > in %{_datadir} and the symlink in %docdir.
> 
> As long as both are marked %doc, there shouldn't be a problem.
If %{_datadir}/<something>/COPYING is used by a package, it's data, not
documentation. %doc'ing it would be a fault.

Ralf



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