Bug#40706: AMENDMENT 17/7/99] /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc transition
On 19-Jul-99, 19:41 (CDT), Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:
>
> The price is actually higher. Richard already pointed out some corrections
> to your proposal, which add complication.
>
> But the real expense is elsewhere. I wonder why this hasn't come up before,
> but here it is:
>
> 1. A lot of packages currently need no postinst or prerm(postrm, depends if
> you use Manojs proposal or Richards correction) script currently, and we
> would need to add one _only_ for this transition.
>
> 2. The prerm/postrm script must never go again, because we handle smooth
> upgrades even if you jump a version number. Otherwise, you will end up with
> a crufty symlink.
I think I agree with this, the effort and additional cruft is to big
for the benefit. As somebody who never use dwww or dhelp, but is always
ls'ing through /usr/doc by hand, I think I'd rather spend the two
minutes writing a script that looks in both /usr/doc and /usr/share
doc than force every package to have a postinst and prerm. And while
the individual effort to add the required lines is low, the cumulative
effort is not.
And it seems to me a that a script that maintained
/usr/doc/whatever->/usr/share/doc/whatever links is pretty trivial (did
I just volunteer to write it?).
Steve
Reply to: