This was discussed a week or so ago, but I never saw a resolution. Lintian
currently warns me about these symlinks in my packages:
W: abuse-lib: symlink-should-be-relative var/lib/games/abuse/addon
/usr/lib/games/abuse-lib/addon
W: abuse-lib: symlink-should-be-relative var/lib/games/abuse/art
/usr/lib/games/abuse-lib/art
W: abuse-lib: symlink-should-be-relative var/lib/games/abuse/levels
/usr/lib/games/abuse-lib/levels
W: abuse-lib: symlink-should-be-relative var/lib/games/abuse/lisp
/usr/lib/games/abuse-lib/lisp
W: abuse-sfx: symlink-should-be-relative var/lib/games/abuse/sfx
/usr/lib/games/abuse-sfx
W: distributed-net: symlink-should-be-relative
var/lib/distributed-net/distributed-net /usr/bin/distributed-net
Policy says:
3.3.5. Symbolic links
---------------------
Most symbolic links should be relative, not absolute. Absolute links,
in general, cause problems when a file system is not mounted where it
"normally" resides (for example, when mounted via NFS).
In particular, symbolic links from one part of `/usr' to another
should be relative.
In certain cases, however, relative links may cause more problems. For
example, links into `/etc' and `/var' should be absolute.
According to Joost and others who posted in the previous thread, symlinks
into /usr (from /var or some other top level directory hierarchy other than
/usr) should be absolute too. Do any people still disagree? I'd like to
get policy changed if everyone agrees /usr should be listed too.
--
see shy jo
