<@james:fedora.im>
16:01:25
!startmeeting fpc
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
16:01:26
Meeting started at 2025-08-14 16:01:25 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
16:01:26
The Meeting name is 'fpc'
<@james:fedora.im>
16:01:30
!topic Roll Call
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:01:34
I am here for once.
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:01:36
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:01:37
Carl George (carlwgeorge) - he / him / his
<@limb:fedora.im>
16:01:40
!hi
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:01:41
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:01:42
Gwyn Ciesla (limb) - she / her / hers
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:01:43
Fabio Valentini (decathorpe) - he / him / his
<@james:fedora.im>
16:02:04
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:02:05
James Antill (james)
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:02:23
I was actually on vacation for the past month but had things scheduled out so that I could join. Unfortunately for whatever reason I could not log into matrix from my laptop.
<@james:fedora.im>
16:02:45
For a month? Are you cosplaying an European?
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:03:00
I was in Norway.
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:03:34
It takes me four planes and something like 28 hours of travel just to get to the island; I'm not going for a weekend.
<@james:fedora.im>
16:03:36
Did you see Fjords?
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:04:15
I saw very many fjords.
<@james:fedora.im>
16:06:41
!topic FPC PR#1480 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1480
<@james:fedora.im>
16:06:55
This seems fine, to me.
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:07:07
yup, i tagged this one
<@limb:fedora.im>
16:07:07
+1
<@james:fedora.im>
16:07:22
Assuming only good people get to own the FNN-backgrounds packages
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:07:25
if you squint just right it would fit under the multi-version exception, but it's a stretch
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:08:19
oh this link is the pr, not the issue
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:08:26
thanks Jason ティビツ for submitting that
<@james:fedora.im>
16:08:48
Yeh, I figured we'd do the exception and then just close the issue due to the PR.
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:09:04
I have no idea why we never just documented it.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:09:23
+1 to the PR
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:09:41
when i was looking for the exception i just searched for "backgrounds" in our issue tracker, and found those two open issues
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:09:57
obviously a proper section in the docs is better than the issue backlog
<@james:fedora.im>
16:11:11
!topic FPC PR#1478 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1478
<@james:fedora.im>
16:11:34
This seems similar to something someone opened recently ... where they wanted to put a generic thing in a specific place.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
16:12:32
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:12:37
Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:13:09
I'm not sure this needs to be documented *there*? ...
<@james:fedora.im>
16:13:27
Yeh, I assume it's documented somewhere though.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:13:33
you always need to tell RPM which package a scriptlet belongs to, this is no special case
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:13:45
this is also the case for %files, and %post, and everything else
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
16:13:46
it should be in the rpm documentation
<@james:fedora.im>
16:15:26
Yeh, I'll close it and say something.
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:15:32
maybe this would work better as a NOTE admonition
<@james:fedora.im>
16:15:40
!topic FPC#1476 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1476
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:18:16
this one confuses me
<@limb:fedora.im>
16:18:58
Same.
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:19:07
maybe the underlying intent was that sometimes packagers need to put stuff in `/usr/lib` even when `%{_libdir}` is `/usr/lib64`
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:19:47
sure
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:20:00
it's a bit confusing that there's two rows that contain /lib
<@james:fedora.im>
16:20:18
Yeh, I think the person is reading it as "if you need to put things under /usr/lib64 or /usr/lib, then use the libdir macro.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:20:21
one is the architecture-independent /lib and one is the 32-bit library path
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:21:02
which might be the source of the confusion?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:23:20
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:23:20
/lib64 (64-bit architectures) and /lib (32-bit architectures)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:23:20
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:23:20
maybe the two rows would be better described as
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:23:20
/lib (architecture-independent)
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:23:26
This is one of those things where I guess I know the difference, so I can't begin to understand why the question was asked in the first place.
<@limb:fedora.im>
16:24:01
And it's one of those things where if you're a packager, you eventually learn it, and if you're strickly an end user, you really don't need to care.
<@james:fedora.im>
16:24:36
Yeh, I'll close it and try to add a comment to help OP out.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:24:44
it's also one of those things that are kind-of specific to Red Hat -ish distros right?
<@james:fedora.im>
16:25:05
!topic Open Floor
<@james:fedora.im>
16:25:24
Yeh, debian don't have lib64 at all AIUI
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:25:42
yeah debian is very different there
<@james:fedora.im>
16:27:50
Oh, this PR got updated and is small now...
<@james:fedora.im>
16:27:50
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1477
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:29:10
I think I'm +1 to that.
<@james:fedora.im>
16:29:53
Yeh, I think so too
<@limb:fedora.im>
16:29:56
+1
<@james:fedora.im>
16:33:49
Okay, merged.
<@james:fedora.im>
16:33:51
Anything else?
<@james:fedora.im>
16:38:38
Okay, going to close in a min. and give every 20m back.
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:38:46
Thanks.
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:39:28
I got annoyed and am working up a PR to fix the warnings that show up when building.
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:39:45
building the guidelines docs site, that is.
<@tibbs:fedora.im>
16:40:03
antora just has way too little verbosity to find some of these issues, though.
<@james:fedora.im>
16:41:29
!endmeeting