Hi Stuart,

Stuart Henderson wrote on Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:22:02AM +0000:
> On 2011-12-14, Aaron Bieber <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 02:04:44PM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>>> Aaron Bieber wrote on Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 08:01:38AM -0700:
>>>> On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 01:54:12PM +0100, Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 09:00:26AM -0700, Aaron wrote:

>>>>>> This patch updates nodejs from 0.6.3 to 0.6.5.  Tested on i386/amd64

>>>>> Shouldn't the manpages be installed to a more generic path?

>>>> I assume you are talking about the pages in
>>>> /usr/local/lib/node_modules/npm/man/man3/ .  
>>>> 
>>>> They are specific to npm, which was just recently added to node, and 
>>>> are generally accessed from the npm command ( "npm help json" for 
>>>> example ).
>>>> 
>>>> Moving them will likely cause problems as npm expects them to be in its
>>>> "node_module" directory.

>>> Well, that could probably be fixed, no?
>>> 
>>> But the names of these pages are too generic.
>>> 
>>> So they either have to stay well well out of the way, in some
>>> non-generic path, as you proposed.  Of course, then they are
>>> of rather limited usefulness, because man(1) and apropos(1)
>>> will not find them.  Given the bad naming scheme, telling people
>>> to add that path to man.conf(5) would be a bad idea.
>>> 
>>> Or alternatively, to make it possible to put them into /usr/local/man/,
>>> they have to be renamed to something sensible, like npm-init(1),
>>> npm-link(1), and so on, and npm has to be changed to cope.  But
>>> probably that's beyond the scope of a port and should be fixed
>>> upstream instead.

> I agree, I don't think we should maintain a local patch for this.
 
>> It's for sure harder than just passing a flag to configure.
>> I will look into how feasible it is.

> I'm pretty happy to commit the diff as-is. Does anyone object?

Just to avoid misunderstandings, i do not object.
I'm explicitly OK with how Aaron handled the probably
less-than-ideal upstream decisions regarding the manuals.
I consider improving all that a question of helping upstream,
and completely optional from a ports perspective.

Obviously, i can't provide a real OK for a port like this one.

Yours,
  Ingo

Reply via email to