I reinstalled my system and one reason was to take a look at these directories that are odd. I choose minimal install and no hypervisor checkbox. In /usr is two directories one is i686-mingw32- and another is x86_64-mingw32- or so directories. Now inside these is a directory called sys-root and inside a Locale directory an directories for languages such as 'ca' and so on. rpm -qf said these directories were not owned by any package. I find this very odd myself. This was not present in f36. Only the 'afs' directory at root and I know it is supposed to be there. IDK if anyone else notices this or not. Not owned by anything. Maybe my tweaks have done it. I can check if there is any mingw packages installed I simply choose 'C Development tools' and add 'indent'. All I do for development type things.

Ok they are /usr/i686-w64-mingw32 and the same only with x86_64-mingw32 and such. I used rpm -qa | grep mingw and got nothing. So there's no package installed on my system called "mingw" anything. Possibly ming is installed though. On Sat, Dec 31, 2022, 9:21 PM Samuel Sieb <samuel(a)sieb.net <mailto:samuel@sieb.net>> wrote: On 12/31/22 17:56, Bill Cunningham wrote: > I reinstalled my system and one reason was to take a look at these > directories that are odd. I choose minimal install and no hypervisor > checkbox. In /usr is two directories one is i686-mingw32- and another is > x86_64-mingw32- or so directories. > > Now inside these is a directory called sys-root and inside a Locale > directory an directories for languages such as 'ca' and so on. rpm -qf > said these directories were not owned by any package. I find this very > odd myself. This was not present in f36. Only the 'afs' directory at > root and I know it is supposed to be there. IDK if anyone else notices > this or not. Not owned by anything. Maybe my tweaks have done it. I can > check if there is any mingw packages installed I simply choose 'C > Development tools' and add 'indent'. All I do for development type things. Which directories are you seeing as not owned?  Other than the specific .mo localization files, everything is owned by mingw64-filesystem.

On Sat, Dec 31, 2022 at 9:58 PM Bill Cunningham <bill.cu1234(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > I reinstalled my system and one reason was to take a look at these > directories that are odd. I choose minimal install and no hypervisor > checkbox. In /usr is two directories one is i686-mingw32- and another is > x86_64-mingw32- or so directories. > I maintain a package that originated on SGI IRIX64 and now builds on linux, macOS, and even windows. For windows I've used Cygwin64, but with WSL2, fewer users have Cygwin, so I ported the package to mingw64, which has the advantages that there are cross compilers on linux which are used by the R-project (there is considerable overlap in the libraries used by R and my project). On my Fedora box: $ doas dnf provides /usr/i686-w64-mingw32 Last metadata expiration check: 2:18:06 ago on Sun Jan 1 10:52:54 2023. mingw32-filesystem-141-1.fc37.noarch : MinGW cross compiler base filesystem and environment for the win32 target Repo : fedora Matched from: Filename : /usr/i686-w64-mingw32 mingw32-filesystem-143-1.fc37.noarch : MinGW cross compiler base filesystem and environment for the win32 target Repo : updates Matched from: Filename : /usr/i686-w64-mingw32 > > Now inside these is a directory called sys-root and inside a Locale > directory an directories for languages such as 'ca' and so on. rpm -qf > said these directories were not owned by any package. I find this very > odd myself. This was not present in f36. Only the 'afs' directory at > root and I know it is supposed to be there. IDK if anyone else notices > this or not. Not owned by anything. Maybe my tweaks have done it. I can > check if there is any mingw packages installed I simply choose 'C > Development tools' and add 'indent'. All I do for development type things. > > -- George N. White III _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Hi. On Sun, 01 Jan 2023 13:03:26 -0500 Bill C wrote: > So is it ok to remove these directories? Or the rpms? I don't use mingw at > all. Directly the directories no: the rpms yes (but see below), but this is small: around 600K each on my system. To identify the related rpms, run for example: find /usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32 -type f | xargs rpm -qf | sort -u On my system this gives: gvnc-1.3.0-5.fc37.x86_64 gvncpulse-1.3.0-5.fc37.x86_64 libosinfo-1.10.0-4.fc37.x86_64 libvirt-glib-4.0.0-6.fc37.x86_64 osinfo-db-tools-1.10.0-4.fc37.x86_64 If you have osinfo-db-tools installed beware, removing it will remove (even with: dnf --noautoremove): gnome-boxes gnome-classic-session gnome-photos libosinfo nautilus tracker-miners Check first if you are using either gnome-classic and/or nautilus. -- francis _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Osinfo-db-tools and libosinfo are listed. IDK what they are for, but that is what rpm says. No other rpms listed.

The one os*-db package is very recent. From Nov or Dec.