[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: /usr/share/doc vs. /usr/doc transition, debate reopened



On Tue, Aug 03, 1999 at 05:32:33PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > > Possibly I'm just misunderstanding what you're suggesting should be done
> > > > though. Can you give a sequence of commands that does whatever you're
> > > > suggesting, and still has those three packages survive unscathed?
> > > That's simple enough.
> > Then please give a concrete example, with actual .debs and actual shell
> > commands.
> I'm not going to do debs at this point. (It won't work anyway, because
> of /usr/share/doc)

So make some fake debs that use /my_usr/share/doc and show that upgrading
and everything actually works. Heck, I've already given you some sample
debs that do this.

> I also don't know how to do it as a shell script,
> because gnu mv is horribly broken. Here's a C snippit:
> main() {
>         rename("/usr/doc","/usr/share/doc");
>         symlink("/usr/share/doc","/usr/doc");
>         symlink("/usr/doc","/usr/share/doc");
> }

This is broken and doesn't work. You've already had three concrete
demonstrations of this.

Sheesh.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.

 ``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it 
        results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
                                        -- Linus Torvalds

Attachment: pgphIjlMNh2gd.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: