Re: symlink vs. directory "conflicts"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
Le 03/10/2012 23:24, Andreas Beckmann a écrit :
>
> So what is the general recommendation about packages that ship
> files over symlinked directories? Should this be forbidden because
> it opens cans of worms?
I don't think that this should be forbidden, but it must be clear
which package owns the directory(ies) and the symlink(s). Any change
in the directory layout must be handled with care and considered a
transition.
> foo ships /usr/share/foo/foo.dat
>
> bar ships /usr/share/foobar/bar.dat /usr/share/foo -> foobar
/usr/share/foo should certainly be considered as belonging to package
foo, also foo maintainer may decide to give it to foo-data or
foo-common for instance. There should be a "foo Policy", discussed
between the maintainers of the relevant packages, to decide which
files may or may not be written in /u/s/foo.
In the case you quote, bar is probably RC-buggy. bar maintainer should
perhaps ask foo maintainer whether it's ok to install bar.dat (perhaps
as a symlink) in /u/s/foo.
Regards, Thibaut.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=jZVA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: