Re: Vanishing /usr/doc symlink
Adam Heath wrote:
> > What happened to the transition plan that said we'd ship woody with a
> > /usr/doc full of symlinks, not no /usr/doc at all?
>
> Nothing. Note that Julian had a /usr/doc -> share/doc symlink. He didn't
> have a /usr/doc directory.
>
> I'm not certain what dpkg would do in this case, when no more packages are in
> /usr/doc, and it is a symlink.
I'm not especially concerned with Julian's case, the important point is
that fresh installs of woody will never get a /usr/doc directory, and so
no symlinks will be made there (since the link creation is done iff the
directory exists). This will result in inconsistencies between debian
systems that were freshly installed and those that were upgraded, and I
think it will lead to some confusion amoung our users.
Bear in mind that many people who are still using potato now are still
used to using /usr/doc now. So they upgrade to woody and that still
works. And then they do a fresh install, and all the documentation seems
to have gone away.
Woody is really supposed to be the release in which our users learn
about /usr/share/doc and switch over to using it; and then the next
release nobody should care when /usr/doc goes missing. Jumping the gun
on this, and worse, doing so inconsistently, is just not a good thing.
--
see shy jo
Reply to: