Hi, On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 13:29:02 +0200, Mark Rosenstand wrote:
On Sun, 2006-08-20 at 14:15 +0200, Tilman Sauerbeck wrote: [...]
We'll have to add "--mandir=/usr/man" to more configure lines in the next few months anyway, while projects update autoconf to 2.60, so it doesn't really matter if we add it to the Pkgfiles where we call autoconf ourselves.
Perhaps it should be considered to just adopt the FHS and use /usr/share/man. My personal concern about doing this (till now) has been all the damned --mandir=/usr/share/man it would take, plus patch/sed'ing some static Makefiles. While I prefer /usr/man over /usr/share/man, I hardly ever access the man pages directly (i.e. using their absolute path), so the extra effort to move man pages around might not really be worth it.
However, there are a couple of packages which don't use autotools, so if we want a single location for man pages (which seems the only viable goal to me) we'll have to adjust some packages either way. Evaluation using http://jw.tks6.net/files/crux/check_man.sh: $ sh check_man.sh /usr/ports/{core,opt,contrib} 2> /dev/null -- /usr/ports/core man with configure: 64 man without configure: 26 -- /usr/ports/opt man with configure: 230 man without configure: 88 -- /usr/ports/contrib man with configure: 158 man without configure: 111 What these numbers don't tell is that for autotools, it's the same change for every Pkgfile, while every non-autotools package is a potential special case, although we might be able to convince some upstream authors to let their packages default to /usr/share/man in the future, pointing at the LFS. Regards, Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@smts.ch Zurich, Switzerland http://jw.smts.ch