Panu Matilainen (pmatilai(a)laiskiainen.org) said:
>>>To-be-installed files obviously have no on-disk
fingerprints, so it
>>>wont work for initial installation. So yes, those "fake"
compatibility
>>>provides are needed. Strictly speaking, compatibility provides would
>>>be needed for ALL the moved files, not just /bin, as it's technically
>>>perfectly legal for a package to depend on an arbitrary path in
>>>/lib[64], not just /[s]bin.
>>>
>>> - Panu -
>>
>>Would it be possible to leave out these provides and fix each individual
>>package to require in the new path instead?
>
>It isn't practical to "fix" every package that requires /bin/sh.
It's not "just" that the impracticality either - not providing
/bin/sh, /sbin/ldconfig and the like would mean a huge
incompatibility break with nearly every existing package in the
wild. Not really an option.
I'm not convinced of the "all" case, though. /bin/sh, /sbin/ldconfig,
etc. could be reasonable for a package to require, and should be provided.
Requires: /lib/modules/3.1.2-1.fc16/kernel/drivers/net/3c59x.ko is likely
too dumb to live, though.
Bill