[Fedora-i18n-bugs] [Bug 1319223] New: incorrect use of Requires(pre)?
by Red Hat Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319223
Bug ID: 1319223
Summary: incorrect use of Requires(pre)?
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Canna
Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com
Reporter: jsilhan(a)redhat.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, tagoh(a)redhat.com
We've identified your package for having `Requires(pre)` RPM flag without
`Requires` [1]. `Requires(pre)` rpm tag could be interpreted wrongly, so to
prevent any harm to Fedora users I am notifying you about this fact.
Any package that is specified in `Requires(pre)` could be freely removed.
Citing from RPM pages:
```
If there are no other dependencies on the package providing /usr/sbin/useradd,
that package is permitted to be removed from the system after installation(!)
``` [2]
If you really rely on dependency just during the installation process and your
package don't necessary require the dependency for the proper run of your
application then ignore this bug report and close it as NOTABUG. Otherwise add
to your spec file additional `Requires` for the dependency, please.
[1] paste.fedoraproject.org/341611/82208431
[2] http://www.rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/MoreOnDependencies
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
8 years, 1 month
[Fedora-i18n-bugs] [Bug 1319099] New: incorrect use of Requires(pre)?
by Red Hat Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319099
Bug ID: 1319099
Summary: incorrect use of Requires(pre)?
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: fontconfig
Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com
Reporter: jsilhan(a)redhat.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com,
tagoh(a)redhat.com
We've identified your package for having `Requires(pre)` RPM flag without
`Requires` [1]. `Requires(pre)` rpm tag could be interpreted wrongly, so to
prevent any harm to Fedora users I am notifying you about this fact.
Any package that is specified in `Requires(pre)` could be freely removed.
Citing from RPM pages:
```
If there are no other dependencies on the package providing /usr/sbin/useradd,
that package is permitted to be removed from the system after installation(!)
``` [2]
If you really rely on dependency just during the installation process and your
package don't necessary require the dependency for the proper run of your
application then ignore this bug report and close it as NOTABUG. Otherwise add
to your spec file additional `Requires` for the dependency, please.
[1] paste.fedoraproject.org/341611/82208431
[2] http://www.rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/MoreOnDependencies
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
8 years, 1 month
[Fedora-i18n-bugs] [Bug 1311848] New: udev rules from fbterm-udevrules should live in /usr/lib/udev/rules.d
by Red Hat Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1311848
Bug ID: 1311848
Summary: udev rules from fbterm-udevrules should live in
/usr/lib/udev/rules.d
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: fbterm
Assignee: bazanluis20(a)gmail.com
Reporter: mhroncok(a)redhat.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: bazanluis20(a)gmail.com, dchen(a)redhat.com,
i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Description of problem:
fbterm-udevrules installs udev rules to /etc
This is not recommended, alrough AFAIK no guidelines exists.
/usr/lib/udev/rules.d should be used instead.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
fbterm-udevrules-0:1.7-7.fc23.x86_64 and possibly ll others
How reproducible:
Always.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. repoquery -l fbterm-udevrules | grep udev
Actual results:
/etc/udev/rules.d/99-fbterm.rules
Expected results:
/usr/lib/udev/rules.d/99-fbterm.rules
Additional info:
You should easily just redefine %fbterm_rules_dir macro
See https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-October/158354.html
(the whole thread) for justification.
(I just found about this because I'm going to package some udev rules and I was
searching for some rules about how to do so and looking for other packages that
also package udev rules).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
8 years, 1 month