[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

source Q: bash/doc vs. bash-doc ?

From: L Walsh
Subject: source Q: bash/doc vs. bash-doc ?
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:25:25 -0800
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201)

What is supposed to be the difference between the directories
of bash-release/doc and the separate tar,
bash-release-doc ?

It seems like -- looking through my local dist, it basically uses
the former for the notes and documentation and don't bother with
the separate "-doc" tar.

It sorta looks like the -doc-tar was descended from the bash/doc directory.

But, for example, the patch files make changes to the bash/doc
directory, but don't update the separate bash-doc.tar.
Isn't this split setup "ripe" for getting the directories out of
sync?  It would seem like the contents of bash-doc might be easier
to "mange" if they were "sync'ed" and merged into bash/doc -- then
only distribute 1 tar?

Not a biggie, but I note with other tools, my distro packagers put
the info from <tool>/doc into /usr/share/packages/<tool> to include
on a system (whether or not that's a good idea is another discussion
:-)), but in having 2 separate tars, they are only picking up whatever
docs happen to reside in the source dir "bash-<rel>/doc"...


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]