On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 09:41:24PM +0200, Kevin Glynn wrote: > Steve Langasek writes:
> > The source updates look fine to me, but: > > * Use absolute paths when making links to doc directories, this stops > > problems for people with symlinked /usr/share/doc (i.e., me!). > > contradicts Debian Policy 10.5. I don't think personal preference in > > configuring symlinks on one's system is a very compelling reason to > > contradict policy here. > Thanks for the reference, I have also noticed this from Section 12.3 > of the Debian Policy: > Packages must not require the existence of any files in > /usr/share/doc/ in order to function [73]. Any files that are > referenced by programs but are also useful as stand alone > documentation should be installed under /usr/share/package/ with > symbolic links from /usr/share/doc/package. > It seems to me that the result of these two policies is that Debian > doesn't support a system like mine that has a symbolic link from > /usr/share/doc to another directory. > That's fine by me, I now have enough space to move it back again, but > I imagine it is quite a common situation. FWIW, in 2.4 and 2.6 Linux kernels you also have the option to use mount --bind, and in 2.6 kernels there's also mount --move, to let you distribute your disk usage in a way that's more transparent to userspace. > Unless you have an alternative suggestion I propose to just back out > the change that turned the relative link into an absolute one. Yes, that's definitely my preference. If you can provide an updated source package with this change, I'd be happy to sponsor the upload. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
