Description of problem: Packages aren't supposed to depend on redhat-lsb, and the latest libcgroup does (and is brought in by policycoreutils). Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): libcgroup.i686 0.36.1-1.fc14 rawhide
(In reply to comment #0) > Packages aren't supposed to depend on redhat-lsb Why not? libcgroup needs /lib/lsb/init-functions, which is provided by redhat-lsb. Of course, I can use file-dependency instead of hard one, but that won't change anything.
> Why not? libcgroup needs /lib/lsb/init-functions, which is provided by > redhat-lsb Because packages are not supposed to be "lsb" packages, they are supposed to be Fedora packages. See: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/346 ...and many threads on fedora-devel.
This has ramifications for our live cds: we now have gettext and cvs on the live cd, pulled in via: policycoreutils-python -> libcgroup -> redhat-lsb -> gettext -> cvs The redhat-lsb dependency is unacceptable.
I agree that redhat-lsb dependencies are not optimal. But running LSB-compliant initscripts without patching is something I expect from a distro. Wouldn't it be better to fix redhat-lsb first?
I think redhat-lsb needs to be fixed. We can fix the dependency at our end, but ideally I would like to see the package fixed so that we can make sure it is installed before sourcing LSB functions in our script.
Using /lib/lsb/init-functions is against our guidelines, fedora packages should use /etc/init.d/functions instead, it's easy to fix this problem. Other distros like debian arch also don't include lsb-init in their default installation, I don't think redhat-lsb is very useful, historically this package was broken several times. See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SysVInitScript Also, you don't need to add INSTALL to %doc See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Documentation
OK, I give up... Let's patch the initscripts until #245494 is resolved.