Ralf Corsepius wrote :
> If %{_datadir}/<something>/COPYING is used by a package, it's data, not
> documentation. %doc'ing it would be a fault.
Why? I don't understand why you claim (and not even just suggest) that.
%_defaultdocdir even defaults to a sub-directory of %_datadir in our
current setup.
I don't see why a program's data under %_datadir couldn't contain its
own online documentation, accessible from the program itself. And I
really think this should be considered perfectly fine, as long as all
of the relevant files are tagged as %doc in order to be easily
identifiable when querying the package.
This is even probably the reason why the %doc tag exists, since
otherwise, why would you need to query a package for its documentation
if it was mandatory for all of it to be
under /usr/share/doc/name-version-rel?
Matthias
--
Clean custom Red Hat Linux rpm packages : http://freshrpms.net/
Fedora Core release 5.90 (Test) - Linux kernel 2.6.17-1.2431.fc6
Load : 0.06 0.23 0.26
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
