http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082318 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082318#c197 --- Comment #197 from Fabian Vogt <fvogt@suse.com> --- (In reply to Kristoffer Gronlund from comment #196)
Is it too late to object to this change, which is completely misguided?
Instead of breaking every single package by changing the meaning of "excludedocs" to mean "let me strip these files from the package", how about adding support for tagging files in an rpm as strippable or optional, so that not only documentation can be dropped when space is at a premium, but any other files that may not be essential for the functionality?
That's what optional subpackages are for though.
That way, every single package would still be OK even without any markup, and packages can be updated to mark files as optional over time. Instead, this %license macro now means that all packages that have used %doc to tag the LICENSE file somehow violate the GPL.
That excludedocs means that files tagged as %doc are not installed is absolutely set in stone and will not change. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.