Mattias Ellert wrote, at 03/25/2009 02:24 PM +9:00:
mån 2009-03-23 klockan 23:38 +0900 skrev Mamoru Tasaka:
> Mattias Ellert wrote, at 03/23/2009 11:31 PM +9:00:
>> It was suggested to me to bring this issue to this list.
>> The packaging guidelines says that a package should not own a directory
>> that is owned by a package on which it depends.
>> The packaging guidelines also says that packages should own all
>> directories needed in order not to leave orphaned directories after a
>> package de-installation.
>> The way rpm/yum currently works these guidelines are contradicting and
>> you must choose which one to implement in your packaging.
>> My question is - is this a bug in yum/rpm, or a flaw in the packaging
> I guess this is a bug in rpm. As far as I am correct current Fedora packaging
> guidelines assume this is properly handled by rpm.
> Actually I filed bug 490975 and am waiting for comments from rpm maintainers.
I added my test case to your existing bug report.
Considering that this bug is the cause for thousands of packages
violating the packaging guidelines, should the severity/priority of the
bug be raised? Should it be made a blocker?
For now I marked this as F11Target (I don't think that we should stop
reviewing submitted review requests until this bug is fixed)