Re: Custom undocumented(7)s are just as bad.
- To: mstone@itri.loyola.edu
- Cc: debian-policy@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Custom undocumented(7)s are just as bad.
- From: Daniel Barclay <dsb@smart.net>
- Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 01:28:32 -0500
- Message-id: <E12MPr6-0005n3-00@dsb.smart.net>
- In-reply-to: <20000130095318.N30262@frederick.itri.loyola.edu> (message from Michael Stone on Sun, 30 Jan 2000 09:53:18 -0500)
- References: <14456.25212.108228.592293@pick.sel.cam.ac.uk> <87so070ykk.fsf@dsp.net> <20000118084743.B288@debian.org> <20000120025731.B3271@resonant.org> <87oga5u5cm.fsf@glaurung.green-gryphon.com> <84ya99jykg.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au> <20000129093354.L30262@frederick.itri.loyola.edu> <20000129105404.V579@willamette.edu> <20000129145729.M30262@frederick.itri.loyola.edu> <20000129221818.B27270@molehole> <20000130095318.N30262@frederick.itri.loyola.edu>
> From: Michael Stone <mstone@itri.loyola.edu>
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2000 at 10:18:18PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > I'd much rather have useful info in README.Debian: this is what you need
> > to do to finish configuring (if necessary), here's a one-liner for each
> > major binary of the package, here's what to read to find out more (info
> > pages, man pages, web site, whatever).
>
> As opposed to a man page for the binary that could be contributed back
> upstream to be useful on systems besides debian?
Regardless of generic stuff, Debian versions also need some kind of
README.Debian file to describe what Debian-specific changes were made
to the package (so you know what doesn't work according to the upstream
manual pages, README files, or other documentation).
Daniel
--
Daniel Barclay
dsb@smart.net
(Hmm. A little worrisome: http://www.junkbusters.com/cgi-bin/privacy
http://www.anonymizer.com/snoop.cgi )
Reply to: