Re: lintian and e2fsprogs: doc-directory policy
Drake Diedrich writes:
> Perhaps the policy could be
> amended to either permit /usr/doc/source-package or suggest putting in
> symlinks from /usr/doc/binary-package to the common
> /usr/doc/source-package (as already done by tetex, libc6, several -dev and
> lib*g, and xemacs20).
Something to keep in mind with putting copyright in
/usr/doc/source-package without links will be that some binary
packages may have eg. a different licence than the other parts. Then
it would need to be specified as a default dir where to find doc.
However, a problem with using no links to doc/source-package/ will be
with binary packages whose names differ too much from its source
package.
But my original purpose was just trying to avoid those nasty "g"'s in
/usr/doc/. I see there's no simple way of doing this because of the
needs of automation, so I think it should not be done as I did till
now (ie. using doc/comerr2/ for package comerr2g).
I now think that the policy itself should not be changed in this
respect, but it may be a good idea to add a recommendation about the
use of symlinks to allow duplication.
--
Yann Dirson <ydirson@a2points.com> | Stop making M$-Bill richer & richer,
alt-email: <dirson@univ-mlv.fr> | support Debian GNU/Linux:
debian-email: <dirson@debian.org> | more powerful, more stable !
http://www.a2points.com/homepage/3475232 | Check <http://www.debian.org/>
Reply to: