Re: RFD: new optional field for 'control'
dhs@firefly.com said:
> o) This MUST NOT be allowed to slow down the progress on dpkg &
> dselect
Ian doesn't have to make any changes to dselect/dpkg whatever we decide to
do . Dpkg will ignore extra control file fields and extra files in DEBIAN/ .
> o) Eventually, we should build this information into the .deb file
> so as to avoid a proliferation of files. As a first step, we
> should just use separate files, so as to avoid delaying Ian J's
> release of dpkg and dselect.
Thus, we can add description.html to the DEBIAN/ directory in the package,
_if_ we wish, right now.
Someone mentioned that having a separate html file would add to directory
clutter. They don't necessarily have to go in the same directory. We could
simply keep all of the html descriptions in one directory, and let the
index creator find them by package name.
> o) Perhaps the eventual standard should be to store these html
> documents on the individual Debian system so as to allow local
> browsing of this information.
I like the idea of having HTML access to _all_ documentation on the local
system. Ray's written the scripts for this already. Consider that package
descriptions are documentation.
> o) As much as possible, the links between the Debian html documents
> should be relative, so that they can be installed on non-networked
> systems.
Now you're talking about shipping more than just one page with each package.
I think it makes more sense to let the user install the package and then let
it add its documentation to the HTML tree when it is installed.
Bruce
--
-- Attention Ham Radio Operators: For information on "Linux for Hams", read
-- the World Wide Web page http://www.hams.com/perens/LinuxForHams, or send
-- an e-mail message containing the word "help" to info@hams.com .
Reply to: