Re: I'm sorry to open another can of worms but.. /usr/share/man transition
Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I am extremely wary of adding large amounts of code to support partial
> upgrades.
My idea to make it work involves a simgle dependancy. No code.
> While we do ensure that the dependenies make the dynamic
> linking and suchlike work without a hitch, I do not see it as
> reasonable to require every package to state the versions of:
> man-db, info, doc-reader, [add your favourite package which will
> look in the wrong place after the FHS move], ...
> upon which they depend, or which they recommend. This would
> approximately double the number or dependencies, mostly
> unnecessarily.
Debian currently has 10 thousand dependancies [1]. I was proposing 1
additional dependancy per package with man page, which does *not* double
that number. 2216 packages contain man pages.
> If we are making such a huge change to the system,
> introducing the FHS, should we perhaps release potato as Debian 3.0
> and warn that partial upgrades/downgrades between 2.1 and 3.0 may have
> nasty consequences in terms of FHS-issues? An incremented major
> number would tend to suggest a major change.
Well we could do that. We would have to actually make all packages conform
to FHS before release though.
--
see shy jo
[1] joey@gumdrop:~>grep Depends: /var/lib/dpkg/available |perl -ne 's/Depends://; $a+=split(/,/); END { print "$a\n"}'
10130
[2] joey@gumdrop:/mnt/mirror/debian/dists/unstable>zgrep /man/ \
Contents-i386.gz | perl -ne 'chomp; s/.*\s+//; map {print "$_\n"} split /,/,$_' |sort |uniq | wc -l
2216
Reply to: