Re: many packages still using /usr/doc

[Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>]

On Sun, 9 Jan 2000, Roland Rosenfeld wrote:

> Do we really have to discuss this again?  We asked the technical
> 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)).  In woody (potato+1) every package has to place its
> documentation in /usr/share/doc/<package> with a symlink
> /usr/doc/<package> pointing to /usr/share/doc/<package>.  In woody+1
> the symlinks have to be removed.

I think policy does not explicitly mention woody or woody+1.

We could well make /usr/share/doc mandatory in the bug sense at the same
time we allow (but not mandate) symlinks to disappear.

Of course, this is something to be discussed after potato release.

Thanks.

-- 
 "e96cf3daf338bd6fc2bb7e6cc54801d6" (a truly random sig)