On 21-Aug-00, 15:56 (CDT), Nicol?s Lichtmaier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I expect that when I install a package named doc-xxxx, all if its > > content is going to be in /usr/share/doc/doc-xxxx. The Debian standard, > > whether spelled out in policy or not, supports such expectation. > > That's a half true. Many packages install files in the doc directory of the > package being documented. /usr/share/doc/doc-rfc/ should only have a > changelog and a README.
1. I subtly avoided those by specifying doc-xxxx rather than xxxx-doc :-) FWIW, I think we ought to come to agreement about the proper behaviour: right now I don't know *where* to look after installing foo-doc. 2. There is no "rfc" package for "rfc-doc" to install with. (Yes, both of the above points are rather facetious...) > Besides, it would be nice to have many rfc packages: doc-rfc-mail, > doc-rfc-web, all of them puting packages in /usr/share/doc/rfc. And > there could be symlinkf pointing to the most recent versions of > standards: /usr/share/doc/rfc/HTTP would point to rfc2616.txt. This is a good argument. I think combined with Colin's idea that it be called /usr/share/doc/RFC (embracing and extending the HOWTO example) I could be in favor of it, as it avoids the package namespace. Steve
