Re: Bug#62378: Redundant directory and package name
> > > > > On Sat, Apr 15, 2000 at 03:14:07AM +0300, Eray Ozkural wrote:
> > > /usr/share/rfc/
> > >
> > > Makes more sense to me. I don't see a problem with the package name.
> >
> > /usr/share/doc/rfc is much better. You don't need an rfc package for that.
> > Look at the doc-linux-html package...
>
> Except that a package named doc-rfc will already have files in
> /usr/share/doc/doc-rfc (copyright and so forth), and so having others in
> /usr/share/doc/rfc is a little weird and unexpected.
For you. Not for me. And I can't think why it would be for the users.
> The /usr/(share/)doc/HOWTO hierarchy has a bit of history to it.
Reply to: