Bug 165530

Summary: standards.info and configure.info should not be included
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Patrice Dumas <patpertusus>
Component: binutilsAssignee: Jakub Jelinek <jakub>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideKeywords: FutureFeature
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: 2.16.91.0.2-4 Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-08-18 17:24:12 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Patrice Dumas 2005-08-10 08:17:44 UTC 
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8b3) Gecko/20050729 Fedora/1.1-0.2.5.deerpark.alpha2 Firefox/1.0+

Description of problem:
Some manuals are wrongly part of binutils. I am not sure which package they should be part of though. And I don't know if the configure manual is still relevant.

/usr/share/info/configure.info.gz
/usr/share/info/standards.info.gz

the standards manual is out of date.

I don't have a very precise idea on which package should hold those kind of manuals. My understanding is that currently the GNU project keep them on the web in http://www.gnu.org/prep/, and also in the gnulib CVS http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnulib.

Maybe the right place would be in a gnulib package, however there are 2 issues. First the gnulib maintainers (at least Karl Berry) are against the packaging of gnulib and prefer that gnulib is used right from the cvs. The second issue is that the gnulib is not ready for installation and the standards.info and maintainer.info are not even built when building the documentation in the doc subdirectory. The gnulib itself is no buit.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
binutils-2.16.91.0.2-2

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
  

Additional info:
Comment 1 Jakub Jelinek 2005-08-18 17:24:12 UTC 
I disagree.  As we are not shipping gnulib, including them in binutils
is as good as in another base development package that is required for all
development work.  In fact, as it has been included there for years, it is
better not to move it unnecessarily.
I have instead just updated standards.texi in binutils from gnulib CVS.
BTW, configure.texi doesn't live in gnulib at all.