Re: symlinks
Ardo van Rangelrooij <ardo@debian.org> writes:
> Ian Zimmerman (itz@speakeasy.org) wrote:
> >
> > > jade (1.2.1-25) unstable; urgency=low
> > > .
> > > * fix a bug introduced in last version where symlink for SP-supplied
> > > declarations were not properly created in /usr/lib/sgml, instead the
> > > blob character was created (oops!)
> > > closes: #124251, #125913, #127630
> >
> > BTW, why are these symlinks needed at all? Of the packages that
> > provide SGML stuff and have transitioned to /usr/share/sgml, only sp
> > and sgml-data seem to maintain such symlinks.
>
> Adam wanted to keep them for backwards-compatibility. In a way this does
> make sense, since we introduce the move from /usr/lib/sgml to /usr/share/sgml
> in woody. I expect these can be removd in woody+1.
Yes. I kept them for folks who have to maintain documentation
that builds in Potato as well as woody. Me, for example. :)
--
...Adam Di Carlo..<adam@onshore-devel.com>...<URL:http://www.onshored.com/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sgml-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: