rpmbackup.pl: /etc/sgml/catalog is not in any package rpmbackup.pl: /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-3.0-1.0-2.cat is not in any package rpmbackup.pl: /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-3.1-1.0-2.cat is not in any package rpmbackup.pl: /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-4.0-1.0-2.cat is not in any package rpmbackup.pl: /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-4.1-1.0-2.cat is not in any package rpmbackup.pl: /etc/sgml/xml-docbook-4.1.2-1.0-2.cat is not in any package (Actually, /etc/sgml/catalog may be a problem with sgml-common rather than with docbook-dtds, but I leave that to you to figure out). if installing docbook-dtds is going to create the files above, then they should be listed in the docbook-dtds RPM so that RPM knows that it owns these files.
Suggest a way of fixing it. These are created post-install.
There are plenty of other official Red Hat RPMS which solve this problem. Consult them. I think the new support in RPM for "ghost files" may be relevant.
Well, the same goes for all the files in /etc/rc*.d.
What are you talking about? All of the files in /etc/rc.d are correctly owned by their respective packages? And what does /etc/rc.d have to do with /etc/sgml? jik:/usr/src/packages/new!43> find /etc/rc.d -type f -print | xargs rpm -q -f apmd-3.0.2-5 netatalk-1.5pre2-6 at-3.1.8-23 autofs-3.1.7-25 vixie-cron-3.0.1-64 diald-0.99.1-2 initscripts-6.50-1 gpm-1.19.6-1 initscripts-6.50-1 apache-1.3.22-4 pidentd-3.0.14-4 inn-2.3.2-6 ipchains-1.3.10-12 krb5-libs-1.2.3-4 console-tools-19990829-36 initscripts-6.50-1 kudzu-0.99.45-1 linuxconf-1.25r7-4 ntp-4.1.0b-5 kernel-utils-2.4-2.4 bind-9.2.0-3 initscripts-6.50-1 initscripts-6.50-1 nfs-utils-0.3.3-2 nfs-utils-0.3.3-2 ntop-1.3.2-5 lpr-0.50-4 portmap-4.0-40 initscripts-6.50-1 initscripts-6.50-1 sendmail-8.11.6-9jik initscripts-6.50-1 kernel-utils-2.4-2.4 samba-2.2.2-10 ucd-snmp-4.2.1-9 openssh-server-3.0.2p1-2 sysklogd-1.4.1-5 vnc-server-3.3.3r2-26 samba-common-2.2.2-10 XFree86-xfs-4.2.0-3.2 xinetd-2.3.4-1.4 cups-1.1.13-1 initscripts-6.50-1 initscripts-6.50-1 initscripts-6.50-1 jik:/usr/src/packages/new!44> I do not understand why you deferred this bug. I have reported this particular problem about many RPMs, and every time I've done so in the past, the developer responsible for the RPM has acknowledged the problem and fixed it. Why should this RPM be exempt from Red Hat's packaging standards?
I said rc*.d, not rc.d. Try 'rpm -qf /etc/rc*.d/*' and you may be surprised. The files that are created are done so in the postinstall script, and so are not in the file list. %ghost doesn't work in this context, apparently: try it and you'll see what I mean. The maintenance of these files is delicate enough without having rpm delete them after upgrade because it thinks it should: [root@turmoil redhat]# rpm -Fvh ./RPMS/noarch/docbook-dtds-1.0-5.noarch.rpm Preparing... ########################################### [100%] 1:docbook-dtds ########################################### [100%] Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-3.0-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-3.0-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-3.1-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-3.1-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-4.0-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-4.0-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-4.1-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-4.1-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/xml-docbook-4.1.2-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/xml-docbook-4.1.2-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-3.0-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-3.0-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-3.1-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-3.1-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-4.0-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-4.0-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-4.1-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/sgml-docbook-4.1-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/xml-docbook-4.1.2-1.0-4.cat Failed to removed entry from /etc/sgml/xml-docbook-4.1.2-1.0-4.cat If you find a nice way to get this to work without it messing up those files on upgrade, let me know and I will happily use that.
1) The symlinks in /etc/rc*.d are a specific exception to the rule that packages must own the files that they create. You can't apply that specific exception to the entire filesystem. 2) It's impossible for packages to own the links in /etc/rc*.d because the packages don't even know what links will be created -- that's dynamic based on whether the services are enabled and for which runlevels. On the other hand, the files created by docbook-dtds are static, are they not? I.e., the packager knows exactly which files are going to be created during install. 3) I don't think it's my job to tell you how to fix this bug. Unfortunately, I don't know for certain what the right answer is. All I know is that many other RPMs have had this same problem and most of them have been fixed. Why don't you talk to other package maintainers and ask them? If %ghost doesn't work, another possible strategy is to create empty files during installation and then replace them with the actual generated files, but if you do this, you probably need to say in the spec file that the size, checksum and mod time of these files should be ignored during rpm --verify. Other bugs of this sort that I've reported for other packages, that have been fixed ,include 50699 and 49234.
The other packagers (in fact, the rpm maintainer) say 'rpm manages packages, not files'. I tried %ghost and %config(missingok), neither of which do the right thing here.
'Red Hat Raw Hide' refers to the development tree for Red Hat Linux. Red Hat Linux is no longer supported by Red Hat, Inc. If you are still running Red Hat Linux, you are strongly advised to upgrade to a current Fedora Core release or Red Hat Enterprise Linux or comparable. Some information on which option may be right for you is available at http://www.redhat.com/rhel/migrate/redhatlinux/. Red Hat apologizes that these issues were not resolved in a more timely manner. However, we do want to make sure that important don't slip through the cracks. If these issues are still present in a current release, such as Fedora Core 5, please move these bugs to that product and version. Note that any remaining Red Hat Raw Hide bugs will be closed as 'CANTFIX' on September 30, 2006. Thanks again for your help.
Red Hat Linux is no longer supported by Red Hat, Inc. If you are still running Red Hat Linux, you are strongly advised to upgrade to a current Fedora Core release or Red Hat Enterprise Linux or comparable. Some information on which option may be right for you is available at http://www.redhat.com/rhel/migrate/redhatlinux/. Closing as CANTFIX.
This is still broken in Fedora Core.
But for Fedora Core there is already a ticket opened about this issue (#193475), no reason for having this ticket reopened. Closing as Duplicate... *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 193475 ***