On 2008/12/14 23:30, Jacob Meuser wrote: > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 11:13:14PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > On 2008/12/14 22:47, Jacob Meuser wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 12:04:54PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > > > > On Sun, 14 Dec 2008, Jacob Meuser wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ok? > > > > > > > > Well... does this mean that now we have 3 different places to look for > > > > info ? > > > > DESCR, MESSAGE and README.OpenBSD? > > > > > > > > It seems even worse now and I think it shouldn't be touched before we > > > > come up with some kind of consensus over this. > > > > > > well, I looked at the MESSAGE files as well as DESCR, and for all but > > > the foomatic-db-gutenprint, the info in MESSAGE seemed just as > > > appropriate in DESCR, and didn't make DESCR overly long. > > > > The problem with putting this in DESCR is that people who already know > > what the software does are unlikely to read it, and historically we haven't > > put much really useful information there, so people aren't trained to look > > there. > > based on the original "complaint", I disagree.
If you're looking to fix a problem, I agree it's one of the first places you'll look, but at first installation ...? Isn't that just making people do extra work for something which is shown automatically now? > > I'd quite like to have MESSAGE separated from updates somehow...what is > > useful at installation time is rarely useful at update time, and vice-versa. > > well, for the case of cups, I kind of disagree. updating base will > overwrite the cups "replacement" files. usually a package update > is preceeded by an update of base. but that is of course a special > case. indeed, but in those few cases you could list the information in both places. Separating them would give less spam at update time (like the various subtly different recommendations for inclusion in rc.local which *are* helpful initially, but you don't need to know later). Then the more important information would be easier to notice. > otoh, if there is one or two easy places to look (pkg_info foo > or a README.OpenBSD), then there is no need for another place. If I install OpenBSD I get some basic information showing me where to look to learn more about using it. Shouldn't I get something similar when I install a package if it's at all non-obvious? Even if it just points me at a readme, a good introductory manual page, or some docs (even on the web) I think this is a good thing. > I just really don't find MESSAGE files useful. and it seems lots > of long time users don't even know about them, they surely know things are sometimes displayed at pkg_add time, and it's reasonable to assume that they're stored somewhere.. > or go digging in /var/db/pkg to find them. Even knowing that there's a pkg_info option to display it, I never remember the letter (and the old one is listed as deprecated and the new one is pages down the man page) so I find it's easier to just look in /var/db/pkg where I know for sure I'll find it...
