On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 10:42:31AM -0500, Neil L. Roeth wrote: > On Jan 9, Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 11:05:42AM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: > > > Mmmm, the man page about dh_installman is quite obscure... > > > Ok, you should write something like > > > > > > debian/a+.1 > > > debian/aplus-fsf.1 > > > > > > within debian/manpages or debian/a+.manpages > > > > Or they can just go on dh_installman's command line. > > I neglected to mention I had tried that, too, with the argument "a+.1". That > did not work. I think it should have been "debian/a+.1", correct?
Correct. They're relative to dh_installman's current directory. > > (Is the man page really that obscure? Maybe I just know what it's > > talking about already ...) > > You mean it's well known to those who know it well? :-) Quite. :) > Seriously, I hadn't tried creating a file debian/aplus-fsf.manpages > which the dh_installman mentions, so I guess that is a case where I > could have RTFM a bit closer. However, the proper syntax for each > entry in the file or the command line argument is not in the > dh_installman man page. I got it from Francesco's email. It's more a matter of being used to how debhelper works. For example, I wouldn't expect cp's man page to say that I had to 'cp debian/a+.1 ...' rather than 'cp a+.1 ...' if my current directory was a level above debian! :) I think the thing to stress is that debhelper tools really aren't magic black boxes - they're Unix tools like any other, and, for the most part, they behave as such. The predecessor of dh_installman, dh_installmanpages, tried to do much more guesswork, but in the end the more normal interface of dh_installman turned out to be better. If you run into problems, I've always found that /usr/bin/dh_* are well-commented and quite easy to read. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
