On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 at 05:15:53 +0200, Manfred Wassmann wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > Note that we don't have architecture-specific man page hierarchies as
> > > mentioned in that section of the FHS. Incidentally, I think putti
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 at 05:15:53 +0200, Manfred Wassmann wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Colin Watson wrote:
> > Note that we don't have architecture-specific man page hierarchies as
> > mentioned in that section of the FHS. Incidentally, I think putting
> > those in /usr/share/man/i386 etc. is a misf
On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Colin Watson wrote:
> Note that we don't have architecture-specific man page hierarchies as
> mentioned in that section of the FHS. Incidentally, I think putting
> those in /usr/share/man/i386 etc. is a misfeature - why not use
> /usr/lib/man for programs only available on the
Previously Martin Quinson wrote:
> I've just checked the policy, and it does not say where the translated man
> pages should go. The FHS is clear on this point (see
> http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.1/fhs-4.7.2.html), and as the policy says we
> should follow it, it's not a critical issue, but I thin
Martin Quinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've just checked the policy, and it does not say where the translated man
>pages should go. The FHS is clear on this point (see
>http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.1/fhs-4.7.2.html), and as the policy says we
>should follow it, it's not a critical issue, but I
Hello,
I've just checked the policy, and it does not say where the translated man
pages should go. The FHS is clear on this point (see
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.1/fhs-4.7.2.html), and as the policy says we
should follow it, it's not a critical issue, but I think it would be good to
update the
6 matches
Mail list logo
