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

Re: Proposal for Lenny: Please avoid duplicated changelogs for binary packages sharing the same source package



On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 03:44:10PM +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I find it wasteful to install the same changelogs (both Debian and
> upstream) in binary packages which share the same sources. Why not
> have symlinks in place of these and perhaps an extra /usr/share/doc
> directory named the same as the source package in case a binary
> package of the same name doesn't exist.
> 
> Maybe this is not the right time but then maybe someone should
> convince me that I'm proposing a bad idea.

  the problem is, you can only do that if you have one of the binary
package that is always installed with any of the other, else you will
have dangling symlinks, and it's prohibited by the policy (no to mention
that it would be quite useless !)

  Though many packages that do have a foo-common and many foo-* binary
packages already symlinks parts of /usr/share/doc/$package/* or
even /usr/share/doc/$package itself.

  If the former has no other limitations than the depends rule, it's not
true for the latter, as there is known issues with dpkg handlink
migrations from a directory to a symlink (or the reverse I never
remember). So when you choose to change your scheme, you need to do that
carefully.

  Finally, TTBOMK debhelper that is the most widely used helper in
debian packages do not offers ways to do that in a simple way. I mean
you have to craft every symlinks by hand and specifically ask for
different dh_installdocs arguments for each of your binary packages.
Maybe what could be done is to write a new helper or extend
dh_installdocs to have such a behaviour.
-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgpST8jku4YQ0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: