On Dec 13, 2007 2:46 PM, Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams at sun.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 02:16:28PM -0600, Mike Gerdts wrote: > > However, I am not convinced that it is needed or worth the effort. > > I say we leave that for another day, if we ever do need it. > > In the meantime packagers not used to having $BASEDIR/bin/../man can get > by with symlinks. >
Nit, but potentially important to some. The exact directory is not $BASEDIR/bin/../man. It is $BASEDIR/man. This is an important distinction for potentially broken directory hierarchies: /opt/foo/bin -> sparcv9/bin /opt/foo/sparcv9/bin/foo /opt/foo/man /opt/foo/man/man1/foo.1 If PATH had /opt/foo/bin, then /opt/foo/bin/../man would really be /opt/foo/sparcv9/man, which doesn't exist. -- Mike Gerdts http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/
