On Tuesday 21 of August 2012 18:58:01 David C. Rankin wrote:
I see your point, but what else installs in
/opt/trinity/share/doc? --
ever? Your approach does provide a solution for a future /usr install
though -- that I do like...
We can also do a packaging/post-install fix on 3513:
cd /opt/trinity/share/doc/kde/HTML/en
for i in ../../../HTML/en/*/; do ln -s $i; done
or
for i in ../../../HTML/en/*/; do mv $i .; done
(but that type of kludge looks bad...)
The way I looked at it was -- it was the same amount of work either way:
(1) create a duplicate set of commits for 3513 setting everything to
/doc/kde/HTML/
(2) attempting to cherry-pick the R14 commits to put everything in
/doc/tde/HTML/
or
(3) create a set of commits to standardize the entire GIT tree on doc/HTML.
If we are looking at some future /usr install, then (2) is the correct
way to go.
Slavek, can you look at the 4/10, 4/11 commits and see if we can just
apply those to 3513-sru and just pull all the docs in /doc/tde/HTML/? That
would also accomplish standardizing doc locations between R14 and 3513.
That would be the way to go -- all things considered.
Thanks.
Interesting idea. The only thing that interferes with so far quite strictly
held principle not rename k=>t. Please (others), what about this breach rules
do you think?
Thanks
Slavek
--