Subject: bug#46236: 26.1; explicit the info files installation

From: Stefan Kangas <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 07:40:00 -0500

Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> writes:

> It doesn't matter.  I'm saying that we shouldn't name them as a matter
> of principle, so as to avoid the few pitfalls you've mentioned, like
> talking about non-free repositories.

Right, I see now what you are saying and I agree.

>> When I say `C-h r' without `emacs-common-non-dfsg' installed on my
>> Debian machine, I get "Info file emacs does not exist".
>
> We could, for example, say something like
>
>   Info manual for Emacs was not found; consider installing it.
>
> which would be more explicit and clear, I think.

That's very good, yes.  It points the user to the solution.

>> I'm therefore starting to think that this should be the responsibility
>> of Debian.  They should solve the problems that they have created for
>> their users; such a warning should be added by *them*.  Doesn't that
>> make more sense?
>
> We could indeed decide that it's not our problem.  In fact, the
> current situation is tantamount to doing just that.

I think the message you suggest above imposes almost no burden on us, so
that would be my first choice here.  That message is also useful even in
cases where there is no shenanigans from the distribution, but just an
info manual that wasn't installed.

If anyone asks us to do more than that, our reply could then be that it
is their problem to fix.