Re: Bug#35762: (lintian could check for hardcoded --infodir in maintaner scripts)
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:17:20 +0200 (CEST), Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> said:
> Manoj wrote, when closing this bug:
>> Since the major rationale for this change was to ensure if we could
>> make the transition to the FHS mandated location, which we have
>> done, this becomes less of an issue. [...]
> What do you mean by "we have done the transition"?
> What we have done is that dpkg has hijacked /usr/info from
> base-files by converting it to a symlink, while it still belongs to
> base-files. Now we can't be sure if packages work because they
> actually follow policy or because the symlink.
> Well, we have the Contents-ARCH.gz files, and yes, they seem to
> indicate that nobody is using /usr/info anymore, but I would only
> consider the transition complete after /usr/info is removed.
So, it seems to me that we don't need duplicate exhortations
in policy (we already have ratified FHS 2.1).
> Can we remove /usr/info?
Probably in Etch.
manoj
--
Massachusetts has the best politicians money can buy.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: