Bug 512336
| Summary: | *.pod files should be marked %doc | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Stepan Kasal <kasal> |
| Component: | perl | Assignee: | Jitka Plesnikova <jplesnik> |
| Status: | ASSIGNED --- | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | cweyl, kasal, lkundrak, mmaslano, ppisar, rc040203 |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | FutureFeature |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Enhancement | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | Type: | --- | |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 694496 | ||
|
Description
Stepan Kasal
2009-07-17 12:17:50 UTC
One issue that we might run into here is that other doc files are not flagged as %doc, AFAIK. E.g. man pages are not (unless there's some sort of underlying rpm mechanism I'm unaware of). (In reply to comment #1) > One issue that we might run into here is that other doc files are not flagged > as %doc, AFAIK. E.g. man pages are not (unless there's some sort of underlying > rpm mechanism I'm unaware of). What are you talking about? man pages have been automatically marked as %doc for ages! (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > One issue that we might run into here is that other doc files are not flagged > > as %doc, AFAIK. E.g. man pages are not (unless there's some sort of underlying > > rpm mechanism I'm unaware of). > > What are you talking about? man pages have been automatically marked as %doc > for ages! And there we go :) Thanks Ralf -- I wasn't aware of that. We have to options:
* Teach rpmbuild to recognize perldoc files (as it can roff).
* Provide a spec macro within /etc/rpm/macros.perl to find all perldoc files and mark them as documentation.
First case is better from point of view of packager, harder for rpmbuild developers as perldoc location is defined by perl executable and can vary across distributions.
Second case is worse for packager as he's required to call the macro manually from %files section. I do not know if SPEC language can provide more automation. More ever %doc macro clashes with recursively included %{perl_vendorlib}/* files. You cannot do both of them.
And finally, why do we need to mark %doc files up? Is it good for anything? Is necessary?
Marking %doc files is valuable when users are trying to save disk space (think OLPC) and install with --nodocs. I suspect the cleanest (but most complex) solution is to teach rpmbuild to recognize perldoc files, but I'm certainly not volunteering. :) I tried with --excludedocs on F-13. It doesn't work for me also for other non perl packages. #621178 This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database. Reassigning to the new owner of this component. |