On 19 Jul 1999, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >>"Santiago" == Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Santiago> So, the *only* remaining reason for the symlinks is the > Santiago> users who have gotten used to look under /usr/doc. Well, > Santiago> they will have to get used to look under /usr/share/doc > Santiago> sooner or later, so this will not help very much. This > Santiago> proposal would just postpone the time when people will have > Santiago> to look at /usr/share/doc. > > You are missing the point. It would be acceptable when one can > look at any *one* directory. Whtehter it is /usr/doc or > /usr/share/doc does not really matter. The problem is the )long) > period of transition, where one has to look at two different places.
But your proposed solution creates an inmense lot of work for everybody, just to keep compliance with a standard (FSSTND) which is not the one that we should follow. Every postinst has to be modified. Every postrm has to be modified. Multi-binary packages will have to be modified a lot, and in many cases maintainer scripts that never existed before will have to be created as new and installed by debian/rules. This is a high price to pay, very high. We have a standard documentation format, which is HTML. People is free of course to cd to /usr/doc by hand, but considering that many packages already use doc-base to register HTML docs, I firmly believe that our time would be *much* better spent if we concentrate, for example, on making doc-base the standard procedure for registering docs, instead of making the FHS transition a hell to everybody. Thanks. -- "32215260b6abab7fffaf1f70ccf7cb1e" (a truly random sig)
