Hello Ludwig, On Mon, 24 Feb 2020, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
bash for example had the man pages in a separate package the last 13 years already :-)
Yes. My point is that this is not a good state of affairs. If the respective package containing the manpage is installed by default together with the main package (as was the case most of those 13 years for bash), it doesn't matter as much. But if it's not installed anymore by default I consider this a quality-of-implementation bug.
(Note that for command line programs I specifically make a difference between man-pages (plus perhaps info-pages in some cases) and all other documentation (which e.g. bash has as well)). ... That one doesn't differentiate between man/info pages and other formats like html though AFAIK. Maybe that's the mistake.
That's my thinking, yes.
Indeed in bash-doc the man pages are just 100k vs 1.8MB for the rest. So man pages back into bash itself I guess.
Another less clear case is perl-doc. It contains API documentation. Not sure where to reasonably split. Maybe at least perl(1) and perlrun(1) should go back to the main package while the perldoc binary (referenced by perl(1)) could go into the -doc subpackage.
Perhaps something like that, yeah. Not the worst idea. Ciao, Michael. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org