[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Sub-categorizing the /usr/doc directory.

On Sun, 29 Jun 1997, Jim Pick wrote:

> One complication I can think of - dselect and the ftp sites have the
> concept of "overrides", where Guy can change the section a package
> is assigned to.  This wouldn't be reflected in the /usr/doc
> directory - of course, this might not really matter.

I think it does matter, as an undesired source of confusion.
It'd be a bad thing to have docs for foo in /usr/doc/utils/foo,
for example, if foo is in section devel and not section utils.

On Sun, 29 Jun 1997, Brian White wrote:

> From a "use" point of view, the user knows what package documentation
> he's looking for when going into /usr/doc, so why does a large directory
> make any difference?
> Let's leave it the way it is.  Splitting it will only make things more
> difficult for users.

someone else (I missed the aqttribution) said:

> > >  The directory is very large when you have a lot of packages
> > > installed, and it takes a lot of processing to open it with a file
> > > manager, web browser, or dired.
> >
> > I completly agree. I have 434 items in /usr/doc, and that's too many.
> > Splitting it up by package section is a very good idea.

I'd agree that a directory with over 400 items in it is probably
excessively unwieldy.

How about creating directories /usr/doc/[a-z], and putting package
doc files into subdirs based on the initial char of the package
name?  That would reduce the unwieldiness of /usr/doc with less
potential for confusion.

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: