Arch Linux

1.8

1.7

Well, sometimes on the net, things reach the other end of the line in ways unintended. I guess that's the reason so many people love using smileys ;-)

Sorry if my comments sounded angry, it was not the case. I was just trying to collect arguments to convince you :)

Keep up your work!

I didn't mean to claim that I know the exact stance of the average Arch user regarding info files. However, the standard approach always has been something like "strip info and doc files since the majority of users most likely won't need them but will rather get the information on the net". So I figured making the extra effort of including an .install file wasn't worth it. I also wasn't aware of the recent change of policy regarding info files. I see your points and will see to it asap. No need to get worked up about it...

Not to mention in this special case:

SEE ALSO
The full documentation for Lzip is maintained as a Texinfo manual. If the info and Lzip programs are properly installed at your site, the command

info Lzip

should give you access to the complete manual.

(from lzip's manpage.)

The official attitude regarding info files changed recently. A template for correct info file handling comes with pacman (see /usr/share/pacman directory). So I would answer your question with "yes".

BTW how do you know how "most archers" behave?

Do you really deem this necessary? Most Arch users don't use info files anyway.

Please remove

/usr/share/info/dir

from the package and add an install file

infodir=/usr/share/info
filelist=(lzip.info)

post_install() {
for file in ${filelist[@]}; do
install-info $infodir/$file $infodir/dir 2> /dev/null
done
}

post_upgrade() {
post_install $1
}

pre_remove() {
for file in ${filelist[@]}; do
install-info --delete $infodir/$file $infodir/dir 2> /dev/null
done
}