Re: Test of Docs Packaging

[James Laska <jlaska redhat com>]

On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 09:27 -0500, Tommy Reynolds wrote:
> 2.  The "noarch" RPM's actually contain the source; that's more a
>    "src.rpm" or "-devel.noarch.rpm" to me.  Don't we need room in the
>    namespace for a PDF / HTML flavor of the RPM?  Perhaps
>    "foo-html.noarch.rpm"?

Any objections to having the rpm contain all flavors?  Seems like less
hassle with that approach.  But we could benefit from standardizing on
the location of how those files get dropped onto the system.

How about the following:

/usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang/     # chunked html
/usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.html # nochunk html
/usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.pdf  # pdf
/usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.txt  # plain txt
/usr/share/fedora/doc/$docbase/$lang/$docbase-$lang.omf  (perhaps a
symlink from /usr/share/omf or vice-versa)

Thanks,
James Laska

-- 
==========================================
 James Laska         -- jlaska redhat com
 Quality Engineering -- Red Hat, Inc.
==========================================