I have a policy question to bring up, regarding our requirements for
documentation. Is the following OK?
Package: foobar
Source: gnu
Depends: %N-shlibs (= %v-%r)
License: GPL
InstallScript: <<
make install prefix=%i
mkdir -p %i/share/doc/%n
ln -s %p/share/doc/%N-shlibs %i/share/doc/%n
<<
SplitOff: <<
Package: %N-shlibs
Files: lib/*.%v.dylib lib/*.1.dylib
DocFiles: COPYRIGHT
<<
SplitOff2: <<
Package: %N-bin
Depends: %N-shlibs
Files: bin/
InstallScript: <<
mkdir -p %i/share/doc/%n
ln -s %p/share/doc/%N-shlibs %i/share/doc/%n
<<
<<
What I am doing is providing the documentation in only one of the splitoff
pieces, in a case in which all of the splitoff pieces depend on that one
piece. Then the required documentation directories for the other parts
are just symbolic links.
Argument in favor: since there are explicit dependencies, and since we are
only building things once, users will be able to find the documentation
we are relying on to justify the license.
Argument against: a users might mess up a fink installation somehow, and
only have one of the packages installed. Then the documentation might not
be present.
I would like some opinions about this. I am inclined to say it is OK.
-- Dave
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
