Bug#44922: PROPOSAL] handling missing stuff in /usr/local

[Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>]

Proposed addition to 3.1.2:
>    Because '/usr/local' and its contents are for exclusive use of the
>    local administrator, a package must not rely on the presence or
>    absence of files or directories in '/usr/local' for normal
>    operation, although files present in there may modify or enhance
>    the behavior of the package.

I second the idea, but:

I'm not sure how this fits in cleanly with the existing wording.  Can
I suggest the following instead:

	  <p>
	    If you do create a directory in <tt>/usr/local</tt> for
	    local additions to a package, you must ensure that
	    settings in <tt>/usr/local</tt> take precedence over the
	    equivalents in <tt>/usr</tt>.</p>
+
+	  <p>
+	    However, because '/usr/local' and its contents are for
+	    exclusive use of the local administrator, a package must
+	    not rely on the presence or absence of files of
+	    directories in '/usr/local' for normal operation.</p>

	  <p>
	    The <tt>/usr/local</tt> directory itself and all the subdirectories
	    created by the package should have permissions 2775 (group-writable
	    and set-group-id) and be owned by <tt>root.staff</tt>.</p>
	</sect1>


   Julian

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

  Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
        Debian GNU/Linux Developer,  see http://www.debian.org/~jdg