On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 12:10 PM Ian McInerney via devel <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> But the packaging guidelines already mentioned not globbing the soname part > of the files, so this change makes no difference to that use case. Extending > the no-globbing rule to other directories like datadir seems very excessive. > Why should we have to list all files a package wants to ship as its data? The soname always (mostly) made sense since it addressed one of the common issues of soname bumps that were often missed that could impact other packages (we still regularly get "unannounced soname bump" emails, which suggests that that package did not have an explicit soname spec; I would hope one of the fixes in that case updated the spec file to address the soname glob). Sure, some packagers are very good about the entire soname bump issue, but I believe that adding the suspenders to the belt was not overly onerous. On the other hand, executable and include files are going to be interesting. I, for one, look forward to seeing the response(s) from someone such as the kernel packager who now SHOULD explicitly identify all the include files in the kernel-headers package (to pick on an obvious example). _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
