Bug 894195

Summary: duplicate directory ownership with perl-libs and perl
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Michael S. <misc>
Component: perlAssignee: Petr Pisar <ppisar>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 18CC: cweyl, iarnell, jplesnik, kasal, lkundrak, mmaslano, perl-devel, ppisar, psabata, rc040203, tcallawa
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: perl-5.16.3-278.fc20 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-06-12 12:08:28 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
patch to make the directory owned only by perl-libs none

Description Michael S. 2013-01-11 00:43:32 UTC
$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/perl5
perl-libs-5.16.2-235.fc18.x86_64
perl-5.16.2-235.fc18.x86_64

I guess it only belong to perl-libs

Comment 1 Petr Pisar 2013-01-11 09:15:40 UTC
It should, but currently `perl' package contains a lot files residing in the directory. This will be fixed once `perl' package will own no files there.

Comment 2 Michael S. 2013-01-11 11:05:04 UTC
Well, perl requires perl-libs, so the directory would not be unowned in any case ?
( and sorry to have waited to enter this bug, as you have already pushed a update for another issue )

Comment 3 Ralf Corsepius 2013-01-11 11:23:55 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> Well, perl requires perl-libs, so the directory would not be unowned in any
> case ?
Are you sure this is correct? I am not.

Actually I think it's a case where dual ownership is correct.

> ( and sorry to have waited to enter this bug, as you have already pushed a
> update for another issue )
Well, technically there is nothing wrong with the directory being owned by both packages.

Comment 4 Michael S. 2013-01-11 12:25:33 UTC
From my chroot :

# rpm -q --requires perl | grep libs
perl-libs
perl-libs = 4:5.16.2-244.fc19

Comment 5 Ralf Corsepius 2013-01-11 17:08:34 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> From my chroot :
> 
> # rpm -q --requires perl | grep libs
> perl-libs
> perl-libs = 4:5.16.2-244.fc19

And your point is?

* Multiple owners of directories are allowed and do work.
* This dependency is manually added. Whether is it's technically necessary is to be analyzed.

Comment 6 Michael S. 2013-01-11 17:52:36 UTC
Created attachment 677016 [details]
patch to make the directory owned only by perl-libs

Being allowed is not the point, this is just not necessary. 

I am trying to write a tool to detect such issues ( double owned directy, unowned one ), because there is case where it break, when the permission are different and no one , see #894369 . The less noise we have, the better it will be for long term maintenance.

So as long as this doesn't bring anything, except noise when searching for issues, I think this should be corrected.

The dependency is likely needed to have the exact EVR between perl and perl-libs.

here is a patch that should clean the package

Comment 7 Marcela Mašláňová 2013-01-14 11:33:52 UTC
Yes, your patch will fix it, but in Perl it's common to "double own directory".