Re: Test of Docs Packaging

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 09:27 -0500, Tommy Reynolds wrote:
> 2.  The "noarch" RPM's actually contain the source; that's more a
>    "src.rpm" or "-devel.noarch.rpm" to me.  Don't we need room in the
>    namespace for a PDF / HTML flavor of the RPM?  Perhaps
>    "foo-html.noarch.rpm"? 

Any objections to having the rpm contain all flavors?  Seems like less
hassle with that approach.  But we could benefit from standardizing on
the location of how those files get dropped onto the system.

How about the following:

/usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang/     # chunked html
/usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.html # nochunk html
/usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.pdf  # pdf
/usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.txt  # plain txt
/usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.omf  (perhaps a
symlink from /usr/share/omf or vice-versa)

Thanks,
James Laska

-- 
==========================================
 James Laska         -- jlaska@xxxxxxxxxx
 Quality Engineering -- Red Hat, Inc.
==========================================

-- 

fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: 
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Red Hat 9]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux