[Mageia-dev] unpackaged files lurking in the weeds

[D.Morgan]

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 3:23 PM, David Walser <luigiwalser at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Fri, 6/15/12, Colin Guthrie <mageia at colin.guthr.ie> wrote:
>> From: Colin Guthrie <mageia at colin.guthr.ie>
>> Subject: Re: [Mageia-dev] unpackaged files lurking in the weeds
>> To: "Mageia development mailing-list" <mageia-dev at mageia.org>
>> Cc: "David Walser" <luigiwalser at yahoo.com>
>> Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 4:53 AM
>> 'Twas brillig, and David Walser at
>> 15/06/12 01:42 did gyre and gimble:
>> > So, maybe we should do something about this.  My
>> preference would
>> > have rpm still complain about unpackaged %excluded
>> files, but not
>> > die, just give a warning instead.
>>
>> Personally, I don't see the point in using %exclude to
>> exclude files
>> completely from all sub packages. We can just use "rm" in
>> the the
>> %install section for that (we typically already do that to
>> remove *.la
>> files for example).
>>
>> So for me %exclude should only operate on subpackage file
>> list and
>> should only be useful to undo any wildcard inclusions:
>>
>> e.g.
>> %files
>> %{_libdir}/foo/*
>> %exclude %{_libdir}/foo/something-in-another-sub-package
>>
>> %files -n sub
>> %{_libdir}/foo/something-in-another-sub-package
>>
>>
>> That kind of thing.
>>
>> That, to me, seems most logical. I'm not sure what the
>> upstream
>> behaviour is, but I would agree that we should follow it all
>> the same
>> even if the goal would be to push for upstream changes when
>> needed.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Col
>
> So, if we want to follow Colin's suggestion, we drop the patch.  The patch changes upstream behavior, and adds the extra usage of %exclude, which as Colin and I pointed out, you can just rm things in %install (or patch Makefiles) instead.

WE DON'T USE ANY PATCH FOR THIS AND WE USE UPSTREAM %EXCLUDE BEHAVIOUR

i wrote in big letters to be sure everybody reads well.