[Fedora-packaging] Re: Directory draft (was Re: Triggers just to avoid unowned directories?)

Bill Nottingham notting at redhat.com
Wed Sep 2 16:59:36 UTC 2009

Toshio Kuratomi (a.badger at gmail.com) said: 
> Section 1.3 Optional functoinality is a special case of Section 1.5
> Common directory without one requiring the other.  I'd combine them like
> this:

I've updated the proposal based on this and other feedback.

> And one more idea to throw out there: How sacred is filesystem?  How
> costly are adding new directories to it?  For something like
> /etc/prelink.conf.d, adding to filesystem seems like the preferred
> option.  If there's little cost involved, adding to filesystem for
> things like /etc/bash_completion.d also seems like the preferred
> solution.  If there's no reason we shouldn't be expanding filesystem,
> I'd list that as an option in the directory draft as well.

My main objections would be:

1) filesystem started out as just the FHS dirs
2) We don't want a bunch of orphan directories if things like prelink
3) We don't want to tie package submission on changes that would require
updates on unrelated packages in older distributions.

It's a combination of philosophical (#1) and practical (#2 and #3) concerns.
We could expclitly state this in the draft if you want.


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list