Subject: Re: where to install man pages (was Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/doc)
To: Johnny Lam <>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 02/17/2005 13:56:07
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Johnny Lam wrote:

> As for whether we should move 'man' and 'info' into ${PREFIX}/share, I
> would rather that we not do that.  The way that it is right now is
> rather low maintenance since we match the defaults and expectations for
> quite a lot of packages, and I don't see any real benefit to moving them
> at this point in the pkgsrc timeline.

I am replying to this again, since I have done some more research.

Including pkgsrc-wip, I see around 516 packages that have patches that
include some reference to defining a man directory.

I see around 989 packages that reference defining a man directory
(directly or via some files or some patch). (Around 380 use GNU_CONFIGURE
so some may not be needed.)

301 packages use INSTALL_MAN directly.

We have numerous GNU_CONFIGURE packages that will just work. (Only some
are too old to support --mandir.) This is around 2480 packages that will
work instantly.

Since we already manually set our ${PREFIX}/man for many packages and
since the other GNU_CONFIGURE packages will just work, we should allow
this to be customized.

I have been using share/man for over a year to build numerous packages. I
have had to make customizations as I encounter them, but most are just
modifying the hard-coded ${PREFIX}/man to my ${PREFIX}/${PKGMANDIR}.

I guess I should set up a bulk build to see how many packages are broken.

Only a few people have commented on this. A few want it and a couple

As for the issue with added support for new custom variable, it can be
clearly marked as experimental.

 Jeremy C. Reed

 	  	 	 technical support & remote administration