Re: many packages still using /usr/doc
On Sun, 9 Jan 2000, Roland Rosenfeld wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Jan 2000, Anand Kumria wrote:
>
> > > Who is expecting 0 here? We expect this for Debian 2.3, but not
> > > for potato. In potato we expect, that every documentation is
> > > available as /usr/doc/<package> (documentation either placed there
> > > or accessible via a symlink to /usr/share/doc/<package>).
>
> > No, we expect 0 here.
>
> Do we really have to discuss this again? We asked the technical
I am not questioning the details here. My inital email was "Does
anyone else have a similair number of directories and /usr/doc" and
"should I file a lot of bug reports against those which do".
You are managing to turn a molehill into a mountain. The answers are
"yes, lots of other do" and "no, I shouldn't".
> committee some time ago to decide how to smoothly migrate from
> /usr/doc to /usr/share/doc and the decision was that every package has
> to provide /usr/doc/<package> in potato (either as a directory (for
> old packages) or as a symlink to /usr/share/doc/<package> (for new
> packages)).
That is not what policy 6.4 says. It says that on a symlink from
/usr/doc/<package> to /usr/share/doc/<package> is valid. Earlier it
says that the Standards_Version: of .deb files will be used to file
bugs if it gets to out of date with respect to the current one.
Here is an additional question: what standards release(s) will be
allowed in potato?
Anand
Reply to: