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

Re^4: document registration policy needing to be written

Am 14.04.98 schrieb apharris # burrito.onshore.com ...

Moin Adam!

APH> >   * no problems with file names
APH> Well you have a point there, possible conflict of namespace in the
APH> /usr/share/... area.  If the files had to be the package name, then
APH> that would take care of that issue ;).


APH> >   * it#s easier to support /usr/local/doc, relative links
APH> We are compelled by policy not to create files under /usr/local, which

That#s right, but the user can create them! And maybe he installs and old  
version of a package under /usr/local. I don#t like absolute paths.

APH> >   * you can move a whole diretory (include documents and our file)
APH> >     without changing "our file".
APH> Things would defineatly break (i.e., the database in /var would now be
APH> out of sync, i.e., look in the wrong place).

I#m talking about the package maintainer and not the user! And it will  
break nothing, because postinst/prerm would be created by tools like  
debstd or debhelper.

APH> >   * you could include the file very easy in a tar archive
APH> What tar file?  What's the point of shlepping around .dhelp or
APH> .docbase or whatever files anyhow if they're not going to be
APH> registered and noticed properly (i.e., no preinst).

dhelp would notice them, if you rebuild the whole database as done during  
installation/updating dhelp.

APH>   install -d debian/tmp/usr/share/doc-base
APH> in your rules file and all reasons boil down to that.  Which I can
APH> sympathize with, although it doesn't convince me.

Where#s the advantage of an absolute path like /usr/share?

cu, Marco

Uni: Budde@tu-harburg.de           Fido: 2:240/5202.15
Mailbox: mbudde@hqsys.antar.com    http://www.tu-harburg.de/~semb2204/

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: