Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Portage QA check for FHS/Gentoo policy paths, for top-level dirs and /usr/share/doc

[Zac Medico <zmedico@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1261 bytes --]

On 10/01/2018 11:16 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-10-01 at 19:23 +0200, Andreas Sturmlechner wrote:
>> On Montag, 1. Oktober 2018 17:48:16 CEST Michał Górny wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2018-10-01 at 08:19 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
>>>> /usr/share/doc level directories
>>>> ================================
>>>> /usr/share/doc/${PF}
>>>>
>>>> The first bug report [2] is for qt-core, which installs documentation
>>>> into  /usr/share/doc/${PN}-${PV} instead of /usr/share/doc/${PF} (${PF}
>>>> includes ebuild revision such as -r1, -r2, and so on).
>>>
>>> No, it doesn't.  There's no /usr/share/doc/qtcore-5.11.1 on my system.
>>
>> This is coming from dev-qt/qt-docs.
> 
> Nope, still not /usr/share/doc/qt*core*-...
> 
>>  It is a problem because any other package 
>> building QCH API docs with cross-references to Qt API needs to install below 
>> this path, and will generate the same QA warning (currently kde-frameworks/* 
>> does this).
> 
> Yes.  That is why I believe that hardcoding the exception in every
> package is simply wrong.  Wouldn't it be cleaner to account for the path
> in the QA check?

There may be cases where we want to fix the ebuild to use
/usr/share/doc/${PF} though, right?
-- 
Thanks,
Zac


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]