Subject: Re: Eval: New package qt3-3.0.1
To: Berndt Josef Wulf <email@example.com>
From: David Brownlee <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/03/2002 14:17:10
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Berndt Josef Wulf wrote:
> This is a weak justification as there are dozents of other so called
> 'user-base' libaries in our package system for which documentation
> is always installed.
> Considering that a user has already downloaded the complete package,
> it doesn't make sense not to install the documentation (except for
> binary packages). I personally dislike the direction the development
> of the NetBSD Packages Tree is taking.
I think a better approach might be to provide a method of
excluding documentation from any package (particularly
useful for handheld and small disk machines). This could
be done as a post install phase which would remove any
entries marked as 'doc' in the PLIST (or similar).
If this seems a reasonable way to go long term, it would
eliminate the split docs packages, except for one or two
that are needed for bootstrap issues.
David/absolute -- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --