Hi,
I noticed that mulitple packages own /etc/bash_completion.d/ even though it is nowadays part of the filesystem package. From what I read from the Guidelines, it is not clear to me whether it is prohibited or not. Should it be fixed? Here is a current list for Fedora 19:
repoquery --whatprovides /etc/bash_completion.d/ --qf "%{sourcerpm}" | rev | cut -d- -f 3- | rev | sort -u | src/fedoradev-pkgowners scop bash-completion cicku be mjakubicek boinc-client salimma bti hno bzr kevin calibre sundaram cowsay petersen darcs bkabrda devassistant lbazan eg thm etckeeper cleech fcoe-utils ausil fedpkg ovasik filesystem rcritten freeipa chrisw git ankursinha hamster-time-tracker petersen haskell-platform salimma leiningen bsjones lilv cleech lldpad greenscientist lttng-tools thm lxc rdieter lyx nbecker mercurial jcwillia mock thm monotone mathstuf ninja-build phatina openlmi-tools pvrabec openscap iarnell perl-Dist-Zilla lotharlutz phoronix-test-suite hubbitus plowshare mrunge python-django mrunge python-django14 jamatos python-doit jruzicka python-novaclient rkukura python-quantumclient jwboyer quilt ausil rpkg scop rpmdevtools adrian source-highlight msuchy spacecmd thias sshmenu pschiffe stgit jorton subversion ultrafredde task thm topgit jskarvad tuned vicodan udisks packaging-team yum-utils
Regards Till
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 21:36:15 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Hi,
I noticed that mulitple packages own /etc/bash_completion.d/ even though it is nowadays part of the filesystem package. From what I read from the Guidelines, it is not clear to me whether it is prohibited or not.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Owner...
| Packages must own all directories they put files in, except for: | | any directories owned by the filesystem, man, or other explicitly | created -filesystem packages
Should it be fixed?
Yes.
It isn't necessary to include the directory in the package anymore, since the filesystem package owns that dir already nowadays.
2014-09-24 22:50 GMT+02:00 Michael Schwendt mschwendt@gmail.com:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Owner...
| Packages must own all directories they put files in, except for: | | any directories owned by the filesystem, man, or other explicitly | created -filesystem packages
Should it be fixed?
Yes.
It isn't necessary to include the directory in the package anymore, since the filesystem package owns that dir already nowadays.
... for all active Fedora branches and EPEL>=7.
- Thomas
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:36 PM, Till Maas opensource@till.name wrote:
I noticed that mulitple packages own /etc/bash_completion.d/ [...]
On a side note, that's the legacy location for bash completion snippets. The modern one from which they're loaded on demand is: $ pkg-config --variable=completionsdir bash-completion More info in /usr/share/doc/bash-completion/README
Hi
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On a side note, that's the legacy location for bash completion snippets. The modern one from which they're loaded on demand is: $ pkg-config --variable=completionsdir bash-completion More info in /usr/share/doc/bash-completion/README
Apparently most packages haven't gotten the memo. Are there bug reports filed? Is this tracked somewhere? Is it ok for a provenpackager to step in and fix it across the repository?
Rahul
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 1:57 AM, Rahul Sundaram metherid@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On a side note, that's the legacy location for bash completion snippets. The modern one from which they're loaded on demand is: $ pkg-config --variable=completionsdir bash-completion More info in /usr/share/doc/bash-completion/README
Apparently most packages haven't gotten the memo. Are there bug reports filed? Is this tracked somewhere? Is it ok for a provenpackager to step in and fix it across the repository?
No tracker bug reports exist AFAIK. And in my opinion this is something that maintainers should discuss with upstreams, and not something that should be done only in Fedora, let alone be done by provenpackagers. If the completion files are not upstream, they should be submitted there.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 09:32:08PM +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 1:57 AM, Rahul Sundaram metherid@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On a side note, that's the legacy location for bash completion snippets. The modern one from which they're loaded on demand is: $ pkg-config --variable=completionsdir bash-completion More info in /usr/share/doc/bash-completion/README
Apparently most packages haven't gotten the memo. Are there bug reports filed? Is this tracked somewhere? Is it ok for a provenpackager to step in and fix it across the repository?
And in my opinion this is something that maintainers should discuss with upstreams, and not something that should be done only in Fedora, let alone be done by provenpackagers.
In principle all fixes should be upstreamed, but this is a trivial packaging change that can be easily and safely done just in Fedora. Installed software genenerally does not care where its bash-completion files installed, or even if they are installed at all.
Every file removed from /etc/bash_completion.d brings us closer to having actual configuration files in /etc, and is a worthy goal.
If the completion files are not upstream, they should be submitted there.
That too, but it seems an independent issue.
Zbyszek
Hi
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
In principle all fixes should be upstreamed, but this is a trivial packaging change that can be easily and safely done just in Fedora.
Agreed but also note that even packages that install to the recommended location don't appear to be using pkg-config as recommended in the README Ville highlighted earlier. As an example, systemd seems to be doing this as well.
Rahul
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 05:45:15PM -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
In principle all fixes should be upstreamed, but this is a trivial packaging change that can be easily and safely done just in Fedora.
Agreed but also note that even packages that install to the recommended location don't appear to be using pkg-config as recommended in the README Ville highlighted earlier. As an example, systemd seems to be doing this as well.
It *is* using the directory, it's just not using pkg-config to query it. It seems a cosmetic issue, since it seems unlikely that bash could ever stop reading completion scripts from either /etc/bash_completion.d or /usr/share/bash-completion/completions.
Zbyszek
On 24/09/14 21:36, Till Maas wrote:
Hi,
I noticed that mulitple packages own /etc/bash_completion.d/ even though it is nowadays part of the filesystem package. From what I read from the Guidelines, it is not clear to me whether it is prohibited or not. Should it be fixed? Here is a current list for Fedora 19:
repoquery --whatprovides /etc/bash_completion.d/ --qf "%{sourcerpm}" | rev | cut -d- -f 3- | rev | sort -u | src/fedoradev-pkgowners
mrunge python-django
Thanks for the heads-up. Fixed.
Matthias
Hi
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Till Maas < wrote:
sundaram cowsay
Fixed directory ownership and bash completion script location using pkg-config as suggested by Ville. FWIW, packaging guidelines has an example using the old location which should be fixed. Thanks
Rahul
devel@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org
-
Matthias Runge -
Michael Schwendt -
Rahul Sundaram -
Thomas Moschny -
Till Maas -
Ville Skyttä -
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek