Re: dh_installdocs ignores package.README.Debian
On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 02:29:34AM -0400, Faheem Mitha wrote:
> On Sun, 2 May 2004, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
>
> > On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 05:20:53AM +0000, Faheem Mitha wrote:
> > > Dear People,
> > >
> > > What the subject says. Dh_installdocs does *not* install README.Debian
> > > as I desire. Can't figure out what I am doing wrong. The relevant
> > > lines in debian/rules are as follows.
> >
> > In order to install a README.Debian, you need to have a
> > debian/<package>.README, that is, without the Debian, in your debian dir
> > (it's already obvious it is Debian-specific because it's in the debian
> > dir thus maintainer-supplied).
>
> This is not what the man page says. What is the source of your
> information?
Pure memory, and it failed. debian/[<pkg>.]NEWS (via
dh_installchangelogs) and debian/[<pkg>.]TODO (via dh_installdocs) have
this kind of behaviour, indeed as others have said
debian/[<pkg>.]README.Debian doesn't work this way.
NEWS & TODO are also documented in the manpage as such.
I think it's really like someone else says, that your dh_* invocation is
broken.
> Unfortunately I don't know perl, so I don't understand the
> code.
perl is really okay to read if you don't know it. I could write basic
perl by just reading code.
> The man page seems perfectly clear, though like all its ilk it could
> benefit by a) a little more verbosity b) the odd example. Man pages don't
> seem to do examples, though. The problem is that I don't see the behaviour
> it describes.
Re (a), manpages are supposed to tersely say what they do, and not more.
They are no beginners guide, a technical reader should find the info he
needs there. IMHO, the manpages for dh_* are at the right balance of
terseness vs. verboseness.
Re (b), did you read debhelper(7)? It refers to
/usr/share/doc/debhelper/examples/
--Jeroen
--
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Reply to: