Not sure if rpmvalidation test makes sense for containers

[bkabrda]

So if I understand the rpmvalidation test correctly, it was meant for modules - to verify that no package from a given module is in violation of FHS standards.

I'm not sure if that should apply to containers, I think there could be two approaches to this:

1. a container is a unit, we don't really care what's inside it => skip this test
2. a container is a bunch of content that got installed during build; we don't care how individual files got inside the container, we want to verify that all of them (be it from RPM or not) adhere to FHS

I think 1) is not a good option, since we're trying to encourage best practices. So I'd go with 2) - but since content can get inside container via multiple different ways (e.g. through pip install, npm install etc), it doesn't make much sense to me to do an RPM-based test. I'd rather verify that there are no directories/files violating FHS just by listing directories/files in FHS-specified directories.

Does this make sense?

[jscotka]

Hi @bkabrda
I'm not sure if we should apply this test to containers. actually we can use it also for containers, it is just another test.
In case container is based on module, it is duplication of same tests.
In case container is done alone without module build. then this test takes bigger effect.

Ideally what you've mentioned, probably we can change it to use directory listing instead of rpm, but I'm not sure how this rule apply to some other apps than RPMs, if also containers produced by fedora, what use some PIP source or NPM should met this FHS policy?