Re: /usr/share/doc (was Re: weekly policy summary)

[Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de>]

On Sat, Jul 31, 1999 at 01:50:39AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > So all new packages will have to depend on this particular version of
> > base-files or newer, or there is still no guarantee that the link gets
> > removed.
> 
> Erm, no, they don't need to declare any such dependency -- the package
> works with or without such a symlink.

The package works, the removal won't. We will end up with a dangling
symlink.
 
> Furthermore, the symlink will get removed as soon as (a) the user upgrades
> to a version of Debian that isn't meant to have the symlinks, or

You mean a specific version of base-files, which is why we would need the
dependency declared on it.

> (b) the
> user gets annoyed and gets rid of it him or herself.

Oh, cool. Is this the solution you offer to this compatibility problem? 1000
symlinks dpkg doesn't know about in /usr/doc until I decide to upgrade to a
package I don't know about (as a user) or until I am get annoyed and do it
manually?

You are making me even more suspicious of this proposal.

> I fail to see what the big problem with fairly obvious symlinks existing
> on a system that's halfway between two significantly different file system
> standards. I also can't see admins being particularly bothered by the
> existance of such symlinks on such systems.

This proposal was suggested to make a smooth transition. If this smooth
transition can't be provided without allowing downgrades and upgrades from
any version to any other version it is not worth the bytes written with. If
the correct solution can not be achieved without keeping a prerm script in
every package forever, I consider the cost to be too high.

But if you want to modify base-files, I think I am willing to let it happen.
I don't consider the dependency on a special version of base-files to be too
high a cost. Without the dependency in every package, I am strongly concerned
about this proposal. We would get dozens of bug reports about the dangling symlink
after removing a package. Don't you remember the removal problem of the
"base" package? We got problem reports years after dropping it from the
distribution.

> OTOH, it *is* inconvenient to have documentation scattered inconsistently
> between /usr/doc and /usr/share/doc. We've even had user complaints on
> this list about it.

We will get a lot more complaints about a broken "solution".

Thanks,
Marcus


-- 
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org   finger brinkmd@ 
Marcus Brinkmann              GNU    http://www.gnu.org     master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de                        for public  PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/       PGP Key ID 36E7CD09