Re: /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc transition, debate reopened
On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 12:05:39PM +0200, Kristoffer.Rose@ens-lyon.fr wrote:
> What other problems could there be with my proposal.
Well, the real reason is that you're trying to rearrange 110M that might
be located on a filesystem other than the destination filesystem. If
someone's doing careful space management, that could cause problems;
also, that move wouldn't be atomic and you'd have to worry about failure
detection and clean-up. I see two valid approaches: first, we could do
the move only if the source and destination are on the same fs, in which
case the move is atomic and there are no potential difficulties. If
they're on different fs's, we leave /usr/doc alone and put in the
opposite symlink (/usr/share/doc->/usr/doc). second, we could come up
with some kind of complicated copy-and-check-the-result script that will
catch all of the possible error conditions (out of disk space,
interrupted operation, etc.) I'm inclined to go with the first approach.
I propose rules like this: if there is a /usr/doc directory and there is not a
/usr/share/doc, and /usr/share is on the same partition as /usr/doc,
move /usr/doc to /usr/share/doc. If there is /usr/doc, create a
/usr/share/doc symlink pointing to it. And, for the next few releases,
if there is a /usr/share/doc, create a /usr/doc symlink pointing to it.
Mike Stone
Reply to: