Jörg Sommer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I prefer putting them in the same section as the main package so that >> people browsing by section in aptitude will actually see them. > I don't like this philosophie. This way packages end up in libs they > don't include any lib: > % dpkg -s opensyncutils | grep \^Sec > Section: libs Agreed, libs probably has to be a special case. For library-only packages, I'd put the documentation in libdevel, since it's generally only of interest to exactly the same audience as the -dev package. > For tools like deborphan it is really hard to detect unneeded packages > and suggest them for removal. But in another discussion someone > suggested to drop the section model and use debtags for sorting the > packages. I think that's a better idea for detecting unused doc packages, yes. Doc packages are unlike, say, library -dev packages in that it's not that unusual for users to install only the docs and not the actual package when they're exploring something. >> But documentation is frequently just what new users want, and new users >> are the ones who frequently won't know to look in some other section or >> use apt-cache to search for a separate doc package. > But packages with documentation are named foo-doc with places them in a > sorted list behind the package foo. They should see them. And foo > should suggest foo-doc. If you put it in a different section, the standard package management tools that I'm familiar with (dselect, aptitude) will *not* show the package foo-doc next to foo by default. I know you can switch to a flattened view, but I doubt many users do that. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
