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

Re: Right of a maintainer not to respect FHS

On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:28:22AM +0200, Pierre THIERRY wrote:
> I have a problem with a bug filed on r-doc-html (#300765). The
> documentation was entirely in /usr/lib, and it seems that all R packages
> have all their files under /usr/lib, whatever their type or purpose.

> I filed a bug with severity serious, as this breaks Policy 9.1.1 (FHS is
> mandatory). But the maintainer argued that R was packaged like this from
> the beginning, and that because it must stay in the distribution, the
> bug had to be downgraded to wishlist.

> SHouldn't he get the approval of the release team or ftpmasters before
> doing such an arbitrary downgrade?


He has the approval of the release team.

When architecture-independent files located in /usr/lib aren't referenced by
the rest of the package and can be trivially relocated to /usr/share, we
certainly should consider it release-critical that they be moved to the
FHS-mandated location.  When a package has many such files whose paths are
deeply embedded in the package, some latitude is warranted.

A similar exception was already made for gnustep for sarge.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: