Bug 512336 - *.pod files should be marked %doc
Summary: *.pod files should be marked %doc
Keywords:
Status: ASSIGNED
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: perl
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jitka Plesnikova
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 694496
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2009-07-17 12:17 UTC by Stepan Kasal
Modified: 2020-10-31 22:40 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Stepan Kasal 2009-07-17 12:17:50 UTC
perl itself and module packages contain *.pod files; these files are a documentation and should be marked as such.

Comment 1 Chris Weyl 2009-10-11 20:24:44 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).

Comment 2 Ralf Corsepius 2009-10-12 03:20:45 UTC
(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!

Comment 3 Chris Weyl 2009-10-12 03:44:28 UTC
(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.

Comment 4 Petr Pisar 2010-08-04 13:10:43 UTC
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?

Comment 5 Tom "spot" Callaway 2010-08-04 13:26:16 UTC
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. :)

Comment 6 Marcela Mašláňová 2010-08-04 13:35:26 UTC
I tried with --excludedocs on F-13. It doesn't work for me also for other non perl packages. #621178

Comment 7 Fedora Admin XMLRPC Client 2013-08-12 11:43:07 UTC
This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database.  Reassigning to the new owner of this component.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.