[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: What is the standard path for documentation?

From: Paul A. Patience
Subject: Re: What is the standard path for documentation?
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 16:30:34 +0000

Hi Ludovic,

On Tuesday, June 8th, 2021 at 09:31, Ludovic Courtès <> wrote:

> Right, share/doc/NAME appears to be more common (perhaps we should fix
> ‘install-licence-files’).

I suppose the advantage of having the version name in the path is
allowing several versions of a library to be installed simultaneously.
Although there would be only one canonical .so file (which is a link
to whichever version is the default), the lib directory could contain
.so.VERSION files.

Of course, if those packages contain include files, the method breaks
In other words, having a version suffix on the doc directory would be
beneficial only when we install libraries for linking.
But binaries in Guix get their RPATH set to the right library, so this
usecase would presumably be less common than on other distros.

All this to say, probably share/doc/NAME should be the preferred convention.

> Thus, I would not install these two files, especially since they seem to
> be redundant with Guix-supported provenance tracking.

Thanks, that's what I decided to do (i.e., delete the files).

Best regards,

reply via email to

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