Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 10:16:40 +0100 (MET) From: "Thomas Gellekum" <thomas@ghpc8.ihf.rwth-aachen.de> To: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) Cc: thomas@ghpc8.ihf.rwth-aachen.de, adam@veda.is, chuckr@Glue.umd.edu, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: doc directory Message-ID: <199603050916.KAA18922@ghpc6.ihf.rwth-aachen.de> In-Reply-To: <199603050849.AAA11136@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> from "Satoshi Asami" at Mar 5, 96 00:49:43 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Satoshi Asami wrote:
>
>
> * I think we also proposed a new variable in /etc/make.conf,
> * something like ${NOPORTDOCS). Porters could then conditionalize the
> * installation of additional docs by
>
> Um, we can do that too, but is this really necessary? I just don't
> see the need of putting this in just to save a little bit of space.
>
> Unless we are advocating putting 100K ps files and such in the ports
> doc dir....
Well, I have the latest icon src at home, and there are a few 100K
of docs going with it. Or elk, where all the important bits are
buried in the tarball.
I don't think it's unreasonable to install the stuff if you think
about some ports' info files:
thomas:134) du /usr/local/lib/xemacs-19.13/info/
6144 /usr/local/lib/xemacs-19.13/info/
The number is in KBytes.
tg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603050916.KAA18922>