Re: I'm sorry to open another can of worms but.. /usr/share/man transition
On Aug 03, Joey Hess wrote:
> One idea that comes to mind is to make any package that uses /usr/share/man
> depend on some package. This might be "man-db (>= 2.3.10-69g)" which is the
> first version that support /usr/share/man. Or it might need to be some other
> package which itself conflicts with old versions of all the man browsers out
> there, to ensure only new ones are installed.
>
> The problem with this idea of course is it means the majority of packages
> have a dependancy added to them. This doesn't seem like a large drawback in
> my eyes, especially because the average package depends on (checks) 2.57
> packages already and it dpkg seems to be handling that fine.
Better yet, require manpage readers that understand /usr/share/man to
provide the virtual package 'fhs-man-browser' (or some better name).
Then we can require all packages that include /usr/share/man/man?/* to
depend on the virtual package fhs-man-browser. Only drawback is you
can't have a system without a manpage reader installed (some people
consider it bloat... go figure :-).
Chris
--
=============================================================================
| Chris Lawrence | Get your Debian 2.1 CD-ROMs |
| <quango@watervalley.net> | http://www.lordsutch.com/ |
| | |
| Amiga A4000 604e/233Mhz | Visit the Lurker's Guide to Babylon 5: |
| with Linux/APUS 2.2.8 | <*> http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/ <*> |
=============================================================================
Reply to: