Subject: Re: INFO_DIR not used
To: Stoned Elipot <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
Date: 03/31/2004 16:09:00
[ On Wednesday, March 31, 2004 at 20:04:31 (+0200), Stoned Elipot wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: INFO_DIR not used
> ==> And well now that info files are no longer listed in PLIST files
> but automatically added the the package inventory listing I suppose
> that yes this can be done. I mean you can consider INFO_DIR to be a
> package builder/user knob vs a package creater/maintainer knob.
Yeah! And that's a "Good Thing!(tm)" :-)
> But I won't do it I guess i.e. I would not provide more
> shoot-yourself-in-the-foot opportunities :}
Why would you think this could cause any problems?
> Besides $prefix/info
> is a pretty well established convention, isn't ?
Only in the GNU world, and perhaps not even there if/when anyone pays
attention to which files are architecture independent....
Oh, but what am I saying? Having info files implies being GNU! ;-)
> Oh right NetBSD uses /usr/share/info...
As should all SunOS offspring and all of the *BSDs, and anything else
derived from them or designed to look like them.
If we're going support the notion of keeping architecture independent
non-system-specific files under a separate hierarchy then we should be
consistent about it.
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP RoboHack <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com> Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>