docdir with "packages" directory
Hi all,
Just a quick question for those who might know.
I understand that Automake generates ${docdir} as
${datarootdir}/doc/${PACKAGE}, as per the Automake manual, section 2.2.3.
While messing around building RPM files recently, I happened to notice
that most Linux distros like to put documentation files into
${datarootdir}/doc/*packages*/${PACKAGE}.
Now, I realize that you can modify the ${docdir} on both the configure
and make command lines so that it contains the correct values for
building a proper RPM. But I have a couple of questions:
1) Why the controversy?
2) Is there any movement within the Automake community to move toward
the LSB directory structure as the default?
Thanks in advance,
John
Re: docdir with "packages" directory
John Calcote writes:
> Just a quick question for those who might know.
>
> I understand that Automake generates ${docdir} as
> ${datarootdir}/doc/${PACKAGE}, as per the Automake manual, section 2.2.3.
>
> While messing around building RPM files recently, I happened to notice
> that most Linux distros like to put documentation files into
> ${datarootdir}/doc/*packages*/${PACKAGE}.
Debian doesn't.
> 2) Is there any movement within the Automake community to move toward
> the LSB directory structure as the default?
Does the LSB say something about this? I don't recall seeing anything
in the FHS, but it's possible that LSB has additional file layout
standards outside the FHS.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu)
Re: docdir with "packages" directory
Hi John, in addition to what Russ wrote: * John Calcote wrote on Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 07:52:39PM CEST: > > 1) Why the controversy? I wasn't aware of any distro using *packages*. Surely Debian, its derivatives like Ubuntu, and RHEL 4 don't use it. > 2) Is there any movement within the Automake community to move > toward the LSB directory structure as the default? Automake just follows what the GNU Coding Standards says for matters like this. It's the entity that should be changed, for Automake to change. So you should involve the bug-standards list in this is, and otherwise this is mostly an Autoconf issue, too, rather than an Automake one (but that's a minor detail). However, so far I don't see a compelling reason for this. If only some distros use this, then using configure command line arguments (or a config.site file) is enough to mandate local policy. Cheers, Ralf
Re: docdir with "packages" directory
Hi Russ,
On 7/10/2009 12:32 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
While messing around building RPM files recently, I happened to notice
that most Linux distros like to put documentation files into
${datarootdir}/doc/*packages*/${PACKAGE}.
Debian doesn't.
My mistake here - sometimes I leap before I look. It appears that some
RPM-based distros use /usr/share/doc/${PACKAGE} and some use
/usr/share/doc/${PACKAGE}-${VERSION}. Opensuse uses
/usr/share/doc/packages/${PACKAGE}, but since I've started researching,
I've not found any references to other Linux distros that use this.
Sorry for the confusion...
John
Re: docdir with "packages" directory
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 20:52, John Calcote wrote: > 2) Is there any movement within the Automake community to move toward the > LSB directory structure as the default? Excuse me, but why automake should prefer one of the many OS and, therefore, one of the many FS layouts over other (except automake's own POV) ? Please understand, LSB-based FS layout is non-common (the same as LSB itself) even in the Linux world. Why do you expect that LSB will be followed somewhere outside? (Please, remember that Automake works in more environments that just a Linux, even in all Linux flavors and distros). -- Andrew W. Nosenko
Re: docdir with "packages" directory
On 7/10/2009 5:42 PM, Andrew W. Nosenko wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 20:52, John Calcote wrote: 2) Is there any movement within the Automake community to move toward the LSB directory structure as the default? Excuse me, but why automake should prefer one of the many OS and, therefore, one of the many FS layouts over other (except automake's own POV) ? Please understand, LSB-based FS layout is non-common (the same as LSB itself) even in the Linux world. Why do you expect that LSB will be followed somewhere outside? (Please, remember that Automake works in more environments that just a Linux, even in all Linux flavors and distros). Hi Andrew, Yes, you are correct. I have already answered previous responses to my original message. As it turns out, LSB doesn't even specify a particular docdir layout. The proper specification comes from the File System Hierarchy standard. FSH states that package directories go directly into /usr/share/doc, which is exactly as Automake does it. My particular issue was specific to SuSE Linux - for some reason, they chose to place package directories within a "packages" directory beneath the proper docdir. I just didn't realize that this was specific to SuSE Linux. Live and learn. Thanks for the feedback. Regards, John
