Re: bin/60049: apm manpages and RC script installed everywhere

["Valery Ushakov via gnats" <gnats-admin%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR bin/60049; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Valery Ushakov <uwe%stderr.spb.ru@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/60049: apm manpages and RC script installed everywhere
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2026 22:35:16 +0300

 On Tue, Mar 03, 2026 at 13:55:01 +0000, jacob.pipkin%icloud.com@localhost via gnats wrote:
 
 >  On Tuesday, March 3, 2026 4:50:01 AM CST Valery Ushakov via gnats wrote:
 >  >  so if you want to get rid of /usr/share/man/man8/apmd.8 you will need
 >  >  to move it to /usr/share/man/man8/{foo,bar,...}/apmd.8 which just adds
 >  >  churn.
 >  
 >  It's already in /usr/share/man/man8/i386:
 
 It _was_.
 
 >  $ grep apmd.8 distrib/sets/lists/man/mi
 >  ./usr/share/man/man8/apmd.8                     man-sysutil-man         .man
 >  ./usr/share/man/man8/i386/apmd.8                man-obsolete            
 >  obsolete
 >  
 >  You're saying that it would also be necessary to have it in dedicated
 >  subdirectories for arm, hpcsh, macppc, and sparc?
 
 The established practice is to install all port-specific subdirs.  I'm
 pretty sure the reason it was moved out of i386 was exactly to avoid
 that duplication.  You are now effectively proposing to undo that
 change.
 
 
 >  What purpose do these port-specific directories serve that is not
 >  served by simply delivering the items in question to the ports
 >  where they are relevant and not delivering them to the ports where
 >  they should not exist?
 
 syspkgs never really landed so I'd day we are mostly chill about an
 extra file or two that might not be strictly speaking necessary on a
 given system.  Any churn that solves one particular instance, but
 doesn't address the problem is general is worse, IMO.
 
 
 -uwe