On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Berndt Josef Wulf wrote:

> This is a weak justification as there are dozents of other so called
> 'user-base' libaries in our package system for which documentation
> is always installed.
>
> Considering that a user has already downloaded the complete package,
> it doesn't make sense not to install the documentation (except for
> binary packages). I personally dislike the direction the development
> of the NetBSD Packages Tree is taking.

	I think a better approach might be to provide a method of
	excluding documentation from any package (particularly
	useful for handheld and small disk machines). This could
	be done as a post install phase which would remove any
	entries marked as 'doc' in the PLIST (or similar).

	If this seems a reasonable way to go long term, it would
	eliminate the split docs packages, except for one or two
	that are needed for bootstrap issues.

-- 
		David/absolute		-- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --