On 13-Jan-2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 05:29:13PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > > To learn about the *package*, you look in the package documentation > > directory, /usr/share/doc/foo/. > > > > I would concur with having, for example, a "manifest" in the > > documentation directory, telling users about significant files they > > have now installed. > > what's wrong with dpkg -L?
On 13-Jan-2006, Alexander Schmehl wrote: > Yes, I don't like that too. But I don't see there a big Proglem: > Running "dpkg -L <packagename>|grep bin" isn't that hard, isn't it? There are many ways available, and *once you know of it*, 'dpkg -L foo' is quite helpful. The problem is that it's far less *discoverable*. If it's information the user needs to understand the package after installation (such as "what executables did I just install?"), that information should go in the package documentation directory. -- \ "People are very open-minded about new things, as long as | `\ they're exactly like the old ones." -- Charles F. Kettering | _o__) | Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
