Stephen Hahn writes:
> 1. Is there a /usr/gnu/{include,lib,etc}? (Isn't another lib just
> asking for trouble?)
No more or less so than /usr/gnu/bin, I'd think.
What's the real difference between a script that expects some exact
command line syntax and output text format, and an application that
expects some function signature and behavior?
> 2. Do we try to construct a meaningful info installation here, or in
> some other common location?
Likely, yes. I don't know why we'd omit important parts.
I don't know if GNU info copes well with having multiple roots,
though, at least for dir.dir. I know I had problems with it back when
I cared about such things. (I don't care now because I usually just
use /opt/csw/info ...)
> 3. I am assuming /usr/gnu/share/man is desired.
There was once, long ago, a reason for /usr/share. One could
theoretically have different system architectures all "sharing"
architecture-neutral bits under /usr/share, such as documentation and
some kinds of scripts.
Those days seem to be passing. We don't even seem to put all of the
highly portable Java bits there, our packaging doesn't respect the
distinction, and nobody, as far as I know, has so little space that he
goes out of his way to share /usr/share among distinct architectures.
Moreover, extending it in this way seems particularly senseless to me.
It isn't as if we're doing anybody any favor by having "share"
directories that are in fact scattered unpredictably all over the
system. If it had to exist, it would have to be /usr/share/gnu, so
there'd just be one thing to share. (And that breaks the one-top-
level $INSTDIR plan.)
I'd rather just give up and use $INSTDIR/man. It's simpler and
everybody expects /usr/gnu/man is in parallel with /usr/gnu/bin.
It would be nice to use /usr/man, as we clearly have tragic $MANPATH
problems. (Section 1G, maybe?)
To integrate with /usr/man for real, we'd have to make this new
/usr/gnu a true peer of the existing /usr/xpg4 and /usr/xpg6
directories. That means making it so that "man foo" gives you
information about the Solaris version, the standards-conformant
version, and the GNU version as well.
That sounds nifty, but is probably fairly hard to accomplish.
--
James Carlson, KISS Network <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
