Bug 77048 - Let /usr/share/applications be owned by *one* package
Let /usr/share/applications be owned by *one* package
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: filesystem (Show other bugs)
i386 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Bill Nottingham
Brock Organ
Depends On:
Blocks: 73984
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2002-10-31 07:20 EST by Enrico Scholz
Modified: 2014-03-16 22:32 EDT (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2005-03-09 13:40:01 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Enrico Scholz 2002-10-31 07:20:34 EST
In RH 8.0, /usr/share/applications is owned by a lot of packages:

| $ rpm -qf /usr/share/applications | wc
|      21      21     384

used by very much packages:

| $ rpm -qf /usr/share/applications/* | sort -u | wc
|    167     167    3121

and accordingly to
http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~ensc/rpmDirectoryCheck/results/null.html, 126
packages are using it but do not own this directory. For the implications of
this practice search for "Does not work when installed with an umask of 077 and
messes filesystem" in bugzilla.

I suggest that /usr/share/applications should be owned by exactly one basic
package (filesystem??). Then the other 167 packages will suppose this directory
implicitly by their requirements.

I am entering this report under the 'distribution'-component because I am not
sure if 'filesystem' would be the right package or if a new package like
'filesystem-redhat' should be created which contains directories not specified
by the FHS. /usr/libexec (see bug #73892 also) will be another canditate for
this new package probably.
Comment 1 Bill Nottingham 2005-03-09 13:40:01 EST
This was fixed around 2.2.0-1.

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