RPM Community Forums

Mailing List Message of <rpm-users>

Re: How is RPMTAG_FILELINKTOS filled?

From: devzero2000 <pinto.elia@gmail.com>
Date: Tue 28 Oct 2008 - 18:50:52 CET
Message-ID: <b086760e0810281050l6d684bb2k3b5671be517e6644@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Jeff Johnson <n3npq@mac.com> wrote:

>
> On Oct 28, 2008, at 12:36 PM, Eric MSP Veith wrote:
>
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> while creating a package, I renamed in the %install section a bunch of
>> manpages by changing their extension from e. g. 1 to 1ssl. RPM-5.1.6
>> creates an implicit dependency for each renamed manpage.
>>
>> I got curious on what (1) causes the dependency generation (it is not a
>> (symbolic|hard) link, just a regular file), what (2) actually triggers the
>> dependency generation and how (3) to avoid it.
>>
>> I tried digging through the source code, but I got completely lost. So I
>> wrote this message to the ML.
>>
>> Thanks in advance!
>>
>>
> What is conceptiually confusing aboy filelinktos (and parentdir)
> dependencies is that there is no change to package metadata content
> whatsoever.
>
> What is being done internally to rpm during install
> is to take RPMTAG_FILELINKTOS (and RPMTAG_DIRNAMES)
> string arrays and wrap the contents as if Requires: had been
> added to the spec file originally.
>
> No matter how hard you look, you will not find any additional
> metadata, its in the implementation.
>
> Add --noparentdirs and --nolinktos to disable the dependencies.
>
> The only remaining issue is what the default in rpm should be.



Just an opinion on the file linkto and parentdirs deps, already posed in
other forms
some time ago (http://rpm5.org/community/rpm-devel/2374.html)

For me it is a "feature" of rpm5 and not a incompatibility: for example
other, that don't have this "feature"
only define the guideline but don't impose then (
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UnownedDirectories).


Being a "feature" could be the case for rpm5, to fullfill automatically but
giving warning at installation time , of  /etc/rpm/sysinfo/Dirnames
and /etc/rpm/sysinfo/Filelinktos. Perhaps a rpm macros could be necessary
for enable/disable this behaviour. Look like a RFE or a plan ?

Opinions ?





>
> Since I might as well not have done the implementation (as with
> --nosignatures and --nodigests disablers) if the default setting
> is always and routinely turned off, I choose to distribute
> rpm with the functionality enabled.
>
> Exercise left to lusers to find how to disable the functionality.
>
> Hint: its very not hard.
>
> 73 de Jeff
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> RPM Package Manager                                    http://rpm5.org
> User Communication List                             rpm-users@rpm5.org
>
Received on Tue Oct 28 18:50:56 2008
Driven by Jeff Johnson and the RPM project team.
Hosted by OpenPKG and Ralf S. Engelschall.
Powered by FreeBSD and OpenPKG.