Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (I think the issue was with the /usr/doc->/usr/share/doc move, not
> with FHS compliance.
Yes, I'm trying to see the big picture, though. Why are we moving to
/usr/share/doc? FHS. Well, then, what about the FHS, are we close?
No. So the only thing that makes /usr/share/doc stand out is that
it's more visible than other FHS issues. It's not more important, nor
more difficult, except insofar as it affects every package. In
package-by-package terms, it's probably one of the *easiest* changes
required by the FHS. (No patching of binaries required.)
So, *why* are we in such a *panic* about /usr/share/doc now? (This is
a rhetorical question, in case it's not obvious.) :-)
--
Chris Waters [EMAIL PROTECTED] | I have a truly elegant proof of the
or [EMAIL PROTECTED] | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.
