Bug 893770 - libreoffice-ogltrans own a directory with libreoffice-impress
Summary: libreoffice-ogltrans own a directory with libreoffice-impress
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: libreoffice
Version: 18
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David Tardon
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-01-09 21:35 UTC by Michael S.
Modified: 2013-01-21 06:58 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-01-21 06:58:49 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
patch against rawhide to remove duplicate directory ownership (6.42 KB, patch)
2013-01-11 11:41 UTC, Michael S.
no flags Details | Diff

Description Michael S. 2013-01-09 21:35:37 UTC
$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/
libreoffice-impress-3.6.3.2-8.fc18.x86_64
libreoffice-ogltrans-3.6.3.2-8.fc18.x86_64

yet :
$ rpm -q --requires libreoffice-ogltrans | grep libreoffice-impress 
libreoffice-impress = 1:3.6.3.2-8.fc18

so libreoffice-ogltrans should not own the directory

Comment 1 David Tardon 2013-01-10 04:58:02 UTC
I know about this. And it is not the only such case... But cleaning it has very low priority in my eyes (unless you can convince me it is a real problem).

Comment 2 Michael S. 2013-01-10 19:38:25 UTC
That's not urgent, but I was coding a tool to detect such problem and the sooner all existing errors will be corrected, the sooner I can integrate it in fedora-review or elsewhere.

If I provides a patch, would that help ?

Comment 3 David Tardon 2013-01-11 04:59:46 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> That's not urgent, but I was coding a tool to detect such problem and the
> sooner all existing errors will be corrected, the sooner I can integrate it
> in fedora-review or elsewhere.

Why would errors in existing packages need to be fixed before? Noone will see them until he runs fedora-review on such a package; or did I miss something?

> 
> If I provides a patch, would that help ?

Sure.

Comment 4 Michael S. 2013-01-11 10:57:43 UTC
My plan for the tool was to take the newly built package, install it in mock ( with deps ), and run the script to see if there is duplicate ownership of directory, or missing directory.

If a package requires libreoffice, then all issues caused by the existing package libreoffice would be seen in the chroot mixed with those of the newly built package, and this add some noise to the report for issue not related to the review.

Comment 5 Michael S. 2013-01-11 11:41:10 UTC
Created attachment 676817 [details]
patch against rawhide to remove duplicate directory ownership

Comment 6 Michael S. 2013-01-11 11:41:58 UTC
I foun dout that most of the %dir in subpackage are also in -core, for good reason, so I removed them ( unless there is a plan to remove -core package )

Comment 7 David Tardon 2013-01-21 06:58:49 UTC
thank you for the patch


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