Bug 515925

Summary: Errors installing pinentry-0.7.4-6.fc11.i586 with --excludedocs
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Alexander Todorov <atodorov>
Component: pinentryAssignee: Rex Dieter <rdieter>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: mtasaka, rdieter
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-09-16 17:55:01 UTC 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: 516757    

Description Alexander Todorov 2009-08-06 11:20:37 UTC
Description of problem:
When installing with --excludedocs there are errors caused by missing files.

Version:
pinentry-0.7.4-6.fc11.i586

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to reproduce:
1) rpm -ihv --excludedocs pinentry-0.7.4-6.fc11.i586  

or:
- use %packages --excludedocs in kickstart
- enable %_excludedocs macro in RPM

Expected results:
Package is installed without errors

Actual results:
Error(s): Installing pinentry-0.7.4-6.fc11.i586
install-info: No such file or directory for /usr/share/info/pinentry.info

Additional info:
This bug is automatically filed with python-bugzilla and component assignment may be incorrect.

Comment 1 Rex Dieter 2009-08-06 11:31:42 UTC
Odd, the scriptlet is:

  /sbin/install-info --delete %{_infodir}/pinentry.info %{_infodir}/dir || :

and the ||: at the end should make errors non-fatal.

Comment 2 Alexander Todorov 2009-08-06 11:41:18 UTC
It's not fatal but better add [ -f %{_infodir}/pinentry.info ] && ...
There are lots of this kind of errors and they are written on the console when installing with --excludedocs

Comment 3 Rex Dieter 2009-08-06 14:02:56 UTC
Then this ought to be changed,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Texinfo
I suppose the output could be redirected to /dev/null.

Comment 4 Rex Dieter 2009-08-06 14:04:23 UTC
I'll take up the issue with the FPC, see what others think.

(I would've prefered if this had been done *prior* to the mass-filing of bugs, but oh well).

Comment 6 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-08-10 15:00:27 UTC
Alexander, would you post your comment on fedora-packaging-list?
Otherwise I think all these mass-filed bugs should be closed
with NOTABUG.

Comment 7 Alexander Todorov 2009-08-10 15:27:58 UTC
Mamoru-san,
can you CC me on the thread so I can reply. I'm not subscribed to the list. 

My reply is this:
Quality Engineering at Red Hat want's clean logs because otherwise people think there are errors with their installation. This is particularly true for RHEL products. Errors like: "no such file or directory" during package installation may generate unnecessary support calls. 

This thing aside clean logs is always a nice thing to have.

Comment 8 Rex Dieter 2009-09-16 17:55:01 UTC
* Wed Sep 13 2009 Rex Dieter <rdieter> - 0.7.6-4
- Errors installing with --excludedocs (#515925)