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

Re: strange behavior of dh_dhelp

  Sorry to interrupt the flamew^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hdiscussion here, but I have a
quick question.

On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 12:01:22PM +0000, Roland Rosenfeld was heard to say:
> > One again: they are *not* accessible via these symlinks!
> They are.

  Well, maybe.  (see below)

> > This may work sometimes but not always -> hack.
> ctte decided, that this has always to work.  If it doesn't, this is a
> bug in the package.

  I assume that I can't start filing bugs against the ~116 packages on my
system (eg, libc6) that moved to /usr/share/doc without leaving a symlink
behind until this becomes part of policy.  Any idea how long that'll be?

  I've attached an estimated list of missing symlinks, generated by the
following command:

for i in /usr/share/doc/*; do if [ -d $i ] && ! [ -L /usr/doc/`basename $i` ]; then echo /usr/doc/`basename $i`; fi; done

  (some stuff, like /usr/doc/HTML, is probably not a bug, and some of the
packages are listed for 'other' reasons -- eg, another package provides
the /usr/doc directory, or (in the case of python) the directory is left as
cruft after an upgrade to FHS..but this is just a first approximation.  While
I'd like to use a shell script to automatically submit a bug for each package,
I think this needs to be checked on a case-by-case basis..)


Afternoon, n.:
        That part of the day we spend worrying about how we wasted the morning.

Reply to: