on Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 12:22:47PM -0800, Osamu Aoki ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:00:28AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 01:03:00AM -0500, Travis Crump wrote: > > > Question about false positives(/usr/share/doc/ directories that don't > > > correspond to a package): Are they a bug or is there nothing wrong with > > > them? On my system I have the following false positives: > > > > > > debian-reference-en, debian-reference-common: /usr/share/doc/Debian > > > doc-linux-text: /usr/share/doc/FAQ > > > doc-linux-text: /usr/share/doc/HOWTO > > > doc-debian: /usr/share/doc/debian > > > > doc-linux-text and doc-debian are special cases, probably > > debian-reference-* too. I tried to formalize the upper-case rule for > > doc-linux-* on debian-policy in August 2000, but never got round to > > following through on the approving noises I got in response. > > In DDP, we discussed to move all DDP document into /usr/share/doc/Debian > just like HOWTO and others. It stand out when browsed by "mc" :)
I'd support this on an organizational basis. These aren't packages, they're additional documentation concerning a specific topic. This should also harmonize (evil in copyright, good in directory names) the "lowercase is packages" association. > organization but now we have very compelling argument for disaster > recovery :) I prefer to think of this as a validation of consistency, rather than a feature which should be explicitly aimed for. There's a distinction. Admins *shouldn't* be blowing away their /var partitions, and they *should* be backing up critical system data, preferably with multiple offsite backups. Yes, we know this isn't the case, but does Debian policy need to accomodate poor practices? >From a consistency viewpoint, however, it *does* become a useful audit check to see if there are any non-package directories consisting of all lowercase alpha characters in /usr/share/doc. The fortuitous consequence that you now have a backup representation of package state is useful. It's not an intentional result. Subtle but important point, namely: if policy at some future point dictates that this arrangement should change, then disrupting the "but you're destroying our backup dpkg status state repository" argument holds no water. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Geek for hire: http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
