Hi, I have just finished packaging freesweep, a minesweeper-game, after having had many problems to do so.
Anyways, the current problem is, that namcap complains about: /var/games/freesweep/{,sweeptimes} being owned by root:games (E) and /var/games/{,freesweep/{,sweeptimes}} existing in a non-standard directory (W)
The point is, that freesweep needs a file, that any user can write to. The way this would be done by `make install' is exactly how I did it in the PKGBUILD - make the file (sweeptimes) and its directory owned by root:games and give the games group write permissions.
Some days ago, Justin Dray proposed to do exactly this to solve a more or less identical problem [1], however I would like to avoid pushing a PKGBUILD whose package does not pass namcap. So is there any better way to achieve what I want to?
Furthermore I don't know, how strict the policy to only use standard directories, as listed here [2], is. And why does the /var/games directory exist if a package may not use it? May it only be populated by installed programs?
[1] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2015-September/031535.html [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_packaging_standards#Directories
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 at 21:16 respiranto respiranto@icloud.com wrote:
Hi, I have just finished packaging freesweep, a minesweeper-game, after having had many problems to do so.
Anyways, the current problem is, that namcap complains about: /var/games/freesweep/{,sweeptimes} being owned by root:games (E) and /var/games/{,freesweep/{,sweeptimes}} existing in a non-standard directory (W)
The point is, that freesweep needs a file, that any user can write to. The way this would be done by `make install' is exactly how I did it in the PKGBUILD - make the file (sweeptimes) and its directory owned by root:games and give the games group write permissions.
Some days ago, Justin Dray proposed to do exactly this to solve a more or less identical problem [1], however I would like to avoid pushing a PKGBUILD whose package does not pass namcap. So is there any better way to achieve what I want to?
Furthermore I don't know, how strict the policy to only use standard directories, as listed here [2], is. And why does the /var/games directory exist if a package may not use it? May it only be populated by installed programs?
[1]
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2015-September/031535.html [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_packaging_standards#Directories
/var/lib/freesweep would probably be the right path and why it is complaining. (see man file-hierarchy for more info, which does not list /var/games at all). I'm not sure why it would complain though, since /var/games is created by the filesystem package, and as you said, that sounds like an endorsement for it's existence to me.
Ownership I'm not sure on, but someone else on this list should be able to advise.
Cheers, Justin
El mar 22/09/2015, 4:25 PM, Justin Dray justin@dray.be escribió:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 at 21:16 respiranto <respiranto respiranto@icloud.com@ respiranto@icloud.comicloud.com respiranto@icloud.com> wrote:
Hi, I have just finished packaging freesweep, a minesweeper-game, after having had many problems to do so.
Anyways, the current problem is, that namcap complains about: /var/games/freesweep/{,sweeptimes} being owned by root:games (E) and /var/games/{,freesweep/{,sweeptimes}} existing in a non-standard directory (W)
The point is, that freesweep needs a file, that any user can write to. The way this would be done by `make install' is exactly how I did it in the PKGBUILD - make the file (sweeptimes) and its directory owned by root:games and give the games group write permissions.
Some days ago, Justin Dray proposed to do exactly this to solve a more or less identical problem [1], however I would like to avoid pushing a PKGBUILD whose package does not pass namcap. So is there any better way to achieve what I want to?
Furthermore I don't know, how strict the policy to only use standard directories, as listed here [2], is. And why does the /var/games directory exist if a package may not use it? May it only be populated by installed programs?
[1]
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2015-September/031535.html
[2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_packaging_standards#Directories
/var/lib/freesweep would probably be the right path and why it is complaining. (see man file-hierarchy for more info, which does not list /var/games at all). I'm not sure why it would complain though, since /var/games is created by the filesystem package, and as you said, that sounds like an endorsement for it's existence to me.
Ownership I'm not sure on, but someone else on this list should be able to advise.
Cheers, Justin
File-hierarchy is less acursted than a blind person in a colour competition, there are several bugs rounding namcap and a few about file-hier and File-hierarchy being missleading or not reflecting, some ended in wontfix report upstream, I tryed report upstream and they are so RH centric and careless than i give up. Just try follow the arch way and look other community packages on gideliness of packaging and examplesbof directoring.
On 09/23/2015 03:53 AM, Pablo Lezaeta Reyes wrote:
El mar 22/09/2015, 4:25 PM, Justin Dray justin@dray.be escribió:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 at 21:16 respiranto <respiranto respiranto@icloud.com@ respiranto@icloud.comicloud.com respiranto@icloud.com> wrote:
Hi, I have just finished packaging freesweep, a minesweeper-game, after having had many problems to do so.
Anyways, the current problem is, that namcap complains about: /var/games/freesweep/{,sweeptimes} being owned by root:games (E) and /var/games/{,freesweep/{,sweeptimes}} existing in a non-standard directory (W)
The point is, that freesweep needs a file, that any user can write to. The way this would be done by `make install' is exactly how I did it in the PKGBUILD - make the file (sweeptimes) and its directory owned by root:games and give the games group write permissions.
Some days ago, Justin Dray proposed to do exactly this to solve a more or less identical problem [1], however I would like to avoid pushing a PKGBUILD whose package does not pass namcap. So is there any better way to achieve what I want to?
Furthermore I don't know, how strict the policy to only use standard directories, as listed here [2], is. And why does the /var/games directory exist if a package may not use it? May it only be populated by installed programs?
[1]
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2015-September/031535.html
[2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_packaging_standards#Directories
/var/lib/freesweep would probably be the right path and why it is complaining. (see man file-hierarchy for more info, which does not list /var/games at all). I'm not sure why it would complain though, since /var/games is created by the filesystem package, and as you said, that sounds like an endorsement for it's existence to me.
Ownership I'm not sure on, but someone else on this list should be able to advise.
Cheers, Justin
File-hierarchy is less acursted than a blind person in a colour competition, there are several bugs rounding namcap and a few about file-hier and File-hierarchy being missleading or not reflecting, some ended in wontfix report upstream, I tryed report upstream and they are so RH centric and careless than i give up. Just try follow the arch way and look other community packages on gideliness of packaging and examplesbof directoring.
Unfortunately I don't know any other package that needs write access to a file for several users, nor such a one that is a game. However, having searched the web, I found nethack in community, which does use /var/games [1].
Group write access is obviously necessary, so I will keep it. Furthermore, since /var/games is neither listed as should-use nor as should-not-use in the Wiki [2], I suppose I may use it, right?
[1] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/i686/nethack/files/ [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_packaging_standards#Directories
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org