$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/perl5 perl-libs-5.16.2-235.fc18.x86_64 perl-5.16.2-235.fc18.x86_64 I guess it only belong to perl-libs
It should, but currently `perl' package contains a lot files residing in the directory. This will be fixed once `perl' package will own no files there.
Well, perl requires perl-libs, so the directory would not be unowned in any case ? ( and sorry to have waited to enter this bug, as you have already pushed a update for another issue )
(In reply to comment #2) > Well, perl requires perl-libs, so the directory would not be unowned in any > case ? Are you sure this is correct? I am not. Actually I think it's a case where dual ownership is correct. > ( and sorry to have waited to enter this bug, as you have already pushed a > update for another issue ) Well, technically there is nothing wrong with the directory being owned by both packages.
From my chroot : # rpm -q --requires perl | grep libs perl-libs perl-libs = 4:5.16.2-244.fc19
(In reply to comment #4) > From my chroot : > > # rpm -q --requires perl | grep libs > perl-libs > perl-libs = 4:5.16.2-244.fc19 And your point is? * Multiple owners of directories are allowed and do work. * This dependency is manually added. Whether is it's technically necessary is to be analyzed.
Created attachment 677016 [details] patch to make the directory owned only by perl-libs Being allowed is not the point, this is just not necessary. I am trying to write a tool to detect such issues ( double owned directy, unowned one ), because there is case where it break, when the permission are different and no one , see #894369 . The less noise we have, the better it will be for long term maintenance. So as long as this doesn't bring anything, except noise when searching for issues, I think this should be corrected. The dependency is likely needed to have the exact EVR between perl and perl-libs. here is a patch that should clean the package
Yes, your patch will fix it, but in Perl it's common to "double own directory".