Re: Why /usr/doc AND /usr/share/doc
On Sun, Feb 04, 2001 at 12:19:13PM -0800, Sebastian Haase wrote:
> I did this on my system:
> $ /bin/ls /usr/doc/ >1
> $ /bin/ls /usr/share/doc/ >2
> $ diff --suppress-common -W40 -y 1 2
> This produces 63(!!!) lines:
Those that exist in /usr/doc but not in the other one are packages that
don't conform to newer Policy.
On my system, the same thing produces 48 lines. <sigh>
[...]
> joe <
It looks like you aren't running unstable, because I'm sure joe's been
converted to the new scheme?
> ISN'T THIS JUST A MESS ???
> I cannot file a bug report against all these packages.
> If the bug in dpkg is fixed now, why can we not fix
> things now one for all ??
The same question has been raised on debian-devel... I don't know if
something was done.
> instead of
> rm -rf /usr/doc; ln -s /usr/share/doc /usr/doc
> I would have to do something like(!)
> mv /usr/doc/* /usr/share/doc; ln -s ...
Perhaps something like:
find /usr/doc -type d -maxdepth 1 | xargs -iDIR mv DIR /usr/share/doc
rm -rf /usr/doc
ln -s /usr/share/doc /usr/doc
That shouldn't have any bad effects, dpkg should follow the /usr/doc symlink
nowadays.
--
Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Reply to: