Bug#51116: Suggestion: Packages should carry a manpage
Goswin Brederlow <goswin.brederlo@student.uni-tuebingen.de> writes:
> Policy says that any binary must come with a manpage. I would like to have
> the same for packages.
I think I disagree. What section would be appropriate?
I think people are becoming too ready to propose grand, sweeping
changes to policy in order to fix obscure, minor problems.
> I just looked for a parser generator that outputs C++ code and found pccts.
> After installation I tried "man pccts", but that failed.
> /usr/doc/pccts doesn't contain examples, so how do I use the thing?
> pccts in fact contains several binaries, but non is called pccts. The main
> binary is called antlr and has a good manpage.
I think a wishlist bug against pccts asking for it to provide a README
with enough info to at least *find* the appropriate man pages would be
a better response to this particular case.
If you *really* want something in policy, I'd suggest: "the package
description should list the binaries (or at least, the main binary) if
it doesn't match the package name." Then, you can use dpkg --info.
cheers
--
Chris Waters xtifr@dsp.net | I have a truly elegant proof of the
or xtifr@debian.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.
Reply to: