Re: /usr/man -> /usr/share/man, etc
On Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 01:36:17AM -0300, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> > > > 3. It won't work. The actual desired dependency is on the content of a
> > > > configuration file, which won't be updated if the user has edited the
> > > > manpath config file.
> > >
> > > Uh? Who cares? Dependencies have always worked this way.
> > Huh? No, the vast majority of dependencies are on functionality, not
> > configuration.
>
> I doesn't make a difference. A package may depend on certain version of
> sysvinit because it handles a certain thing in one of its configuration
> files. A package might depend on a certain version of apache, the one that
> have the Debian web standards compliant httpd.conf (these are imaginary
> examples, it's late here.. =) ).
Those are configuration files, and nothing guarantees that the user will
use the generic file or fold in the changes made in it. Such dependency
wouldn't be reliable.
> > I guess it just seems to me to be a lot of work to implement a huge
> > hammer to pound down a very small nail. Just put it in the upgrade docs.
>
> Now it is. If the upgrade had been better planned, we would have be able to
> do this very easily, because we would have got a precise "FHS migration
> guidelines for upgrading your pet package". Now this discussion is rather
> pointless.. =)
The Release Notes mention in one place that you can't access manpages in
/usr/share/man without upgrading man-db. I haven't noticed any bug reports
from users saying they can't view some manpages. I don't think anyone will
have a major problem with this.
--
Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Reply to: