On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 12:56:41PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > Ignore the problem and it'll go away? feh. > > Is it the end of the world if there's a symlink from /usr/doc to > /usr/share/doc? Will the sky fall, or will there be other similarly > important reasons for dealing with it immediately? I think what we've > really learned here is that we need some flexibility in dealing with > this sort of thing. As a matter of fact, I just posted a message this morning demonstrating that should a package move to /usr/share/doc at any point after its files get moved in this fashion, it WILL in fact cause dpkg to erase the documentation, something that it will happily do quietly and will require reinstallation of the package in order to get the docs back. > If we want to get rid of that symlink, we need a way > to create an appropriate dependency. Some people have suggested putting > a depends: base-files-whatever in _every_ debian package for the rest of > time. I'm not sure that's a clean approach. (I think it would be nicer > to abstract this more: packages already have to indicate what > policy-version they comply with, why not use that information to set the > appropriate dependency?) Until we have a clean way of dealing with this > problem, I don't see what harm there is in not jumping the gun. You can > spit juvenile responses like "feh" at me all you want, but that doesn't > help resolve this mess. This will be my last message to you until you take the time to read the rest of the discussion. Think and say what you will about me, I frankly don't care. But at least I'm working on solutions to problems, rather than trying to take the cop-out approach of putting it off until later. > > We put off the archive restructure discussion until hamm was released, but > > it never got addressed until we were gearing up for slink release and was > > put off again. Now it's come up still again in time for it to be put > > aside until potato's release. > > So what? (I'm quite serious here: I'm still trying to understand what > the problem is.) Are we trying to shove things out, or are we trying to > get things right? If you come up with a clean solution, you might get > things closer to a resolution. Complaining that people aren't working > fast enough for you won't speed things up. I really suggest you go back and read the two dozen or more messages in which people who should be regarded as much more authoritive on the subject than I have said that dpkg will do bad things if symlinks are used. The thought of moving /usr/doc is one I have supported, however in every message I've written supporting it I've said up front that dpkg ABSOLUTELY MUST BE FIXED prior to this happening. -- Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> Debian GNU/Linux developer GnuPG: 2048g/3F9C2A43 - 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3 PGP 2.6: 2048R/50BDA0ED - E8 D6 84 81 E3 A8 BB 77 8E E2 29 96 C9 44 5F BE -------------------------------------------------------------------------- * bma is a yank * Knghtbrd is a Knghtbrd * dhd is also a yank * Espy is evil * Knghtbrd believes Espy
Attachment:
pgpDP6UvCsMlu.pgp
Description: PGP signature