[Fedora-packaging] tex/latex doc install location
Toshio Kuratomi
a.badger at gmail.com
Mon Jan 21 20:15:55 UTC 2008
Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 08:12:32AM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>>> location.
>>>
>> I also favor this reasoning but I know that we presently have other
>> examples of documentation following a different upstream convention (For
>> instance, ruby gems). In addition, this case may be more like man, info,
>> or ghelp than like ruby gems.
>>
>> One thing I'd like to ask about from the original post::
>> In tex/latex bundled in fedora (I guess it comes from tetex and it is
>> now in texlive) there is a simple system to view documentation.
>>
>> What is this "simple system"? We do have a rule that nothing marked as
>> %doc should break an application if it is not present on the system. If
>> this help system is integrated into applications (like ghelp for gnome)
>> then this would count under that rule. If it's more like man and info
>> pages then we'd want them to be marked as doc even if they are located
>> somewhere other than %{_docdir}.
>
> It is more like info pages (and see the other response for more in-depth
> explanations...), and should be marked as %doc. And they are rightly marked
> as %doc in packages that installs them here (texlive, for example).
>
Sounds good. FWIW, I think %{_datadir}/texmf/doc is fine.
-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20080121/3bed1648/attachment.bin
More information about the packaging
mailing list