Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 13:21:52 -0800 From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: adam@veda.is Cc: chuckr@Glue.umd.edu, thomas@ghpc8.ihf.rwth-aachen.de, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: doc directory Message-ID: <199603012121.NAA01260@sunrise.cs.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: <199603011715.RAA03672@veda.is> (message from Adam David on Fri, 1 Mar 1996 17:15:37 %2B0000 (GMT))
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* > (1) Add "share/doc" to /etc/mtree/BSD.local.dist so that the directory
* > is created by mtree
*
* Yes, this is what I was suggesting, and there seems to be agreement that
* share/doc is preferable to plain doc. Please may I commit this now? :)
Yes, I think we've seen no objections.
* Looks reasonable. Another good reason to keep it out of bsd.port.mk
* is that ${DISTNAME} and ${PKGNAME} usually carry a version number,
* but ${DOCDIR} could be something else entirely (for instance
* without the version number, or simply
That's right, this can be anything that the port desires.
Actually, I think it's better to leave out the version number for most
cases. If you have a version number in the directory name, when you
upgrade a port, you will have to change pkg/PLIST to reflect it, and I
can see people forgetting it (and me not noticing it because "make
package" will happily use the old docs!).
The exception of course is things like tcl/tk, where having multiple
versions of the same software makes sense. Usually, the installation
of the new version will overwrite the binary/library etc., anyway, so
there is not much use in keeping a separate directory for old
documents....
Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603012121.NAA01260>