Johnie Ingram wrote: > And I choose not to wait for him, a debhelper thats compliant can be > tested at: > > http://netgod.net/x/debhelper_2.0.21-0.0_all.deb > > Only problem found so far is that using it breaks the autobuild > machines using the /usr/doc debhelper. But if 70% of packages can be > converted with a simple recompile, I don't see what the big > controversy is.
FWIW, the modified debhelper doesn't bother me at all; that's what free software's all about. But your last sentance completly ignores the entire /usr/share/doc transition problem. Since I have repeatedly tried to explain this problem until I am utterly sick of doing so, including while you were present in the flesh, as well as on these lists and on IRC, do you really not get it still, or are you just choosing to ignore it? A hint: nobody ever claimed building packages that used /usr/share/doc would be a problem. In fact, as long ago as 2 years, people were confident debhelper would handle that part of the transition very easily. That's not the problem. Do you know what the problem is? (If not I may have to try to explain it one more time. Bleh.) -- see shy jo
