Other concerns notwithstanding, this package in fact does not violate the FHS. libgems-ruby does not itself install any files under /usr/local, nor AIUI is it intended that this be used to create other packages which ship files under /usr/local (or that modify /usr/local at install time).
The FHS states that OS packages must use the /usr and /var heirarchies for files that they install; it does not say that OSes may not provide other services, in package form, that allow the user to manage /usr/local if she chooses. Here is a short list of other pieces of software we ship that facilitate management of /usr/local, without being FHS violations: - autoconf - ExtUtils::MakeMaker (in perl-modules) - distutis (in python2.x-dev) - stow As long as "gem install" is a command run by the user (or by third-party software the user chooses to run), and not something that will be run as a consequence of invoking the package manager, I don't see that this is a problem. Downgrading back to 'high', since an FHS violation was given as the justification for 'critical'. ** Changed in: libgems-ruby (Ubuntu) Importance: Critical => High -- rubygems bin in PATH potentially breaks other applications and violates all sense of decency in packaging. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/262063 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
