On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Thursday 09 December 2010, Tom Callaway wrote:
> The guidelines have been updated to indicate that %doc files must not
> have executable permissions.
Why? If they (example scripts etc) don't add any dependencies that aren't
already in the package's dependency chain, what is the problem solved by this
guideline, and how do you propose handling these files instead?
Wouldn't it be better if this issue is solved on the rpmbuild side
instead of putting it as extra work on packagers?
rpmbuild can call either chmod -x on the %doc files at the end; or if
the problem is just the dependencies added by executable %doc files,
then rpmbuild can be taught to not scan the %doc files for generating
dependencies. If no, why not?
Orcan