for the following example,
==========================

the files in 

p4359386 directory, a.java and c.java

p4359386/a.java
	/c.java


a.java is
==========

package p4359386;

public class a
{
}

c.java is
=========

package p4359386;

public class c
{
}

do a

javadoc a.java c.java

and observe that the "Package" link is disabled from

deprecated-list.html
index-all.html
help-doc.html
overview-tree.html

whereas it is 'enabled' from

index.html
package-tree.html
a.html
c.html

Though the argument can be that the first four are generic pages, common for most javadoc runs, this introduces a confusing behaviour. The behaviour should be uniform and the std doclet should introduce links uniformly.

N/A

This is a bug.  He is saying that when you are documenting only a single
package, the Package link should always be active, because it is always
clear which package is active.  The Overview link appears if -overview
is passed in, and does not appear if -overview is not passed in.
When present, the Overview link is always active -- the Package link 
would serve a similar purpose.

BTW, the correct command is:
javadoc p4359386/a.java p4359386/c.java

Changed synopsis from:
  No link to package-summary.html from other htmls

  stddoclet: Package link should always be active when document'g only one package

  xxxxx@xxxxx   2002-05-21

  xxxxx@xxxxx   also suggests:
I think that the package link on all of the general pages 
(deprecated-list.html, index-all.html, help-doc.html, overview-tree.html) 
should link to index.html since that is a general package list.  
We do that on package-tree.html and I think it feels natural.  
Notice that the "Package" link is highlited on index.html
(when the "Overview" link is not present, which happens
when only one package is documented).

  xxxxx@xxxxx  

I agree with   xxxxx@xxxxx   with one change -- when one package is being 
documented, the package link on all general pages should link to package-summary.html (not index.html, which is a frameset file and 
would cause frames to appear if they were off).

  xxxxx@xxxxx   2003-09-24

Fixed.
  xxxxx@xxxxx   2003-11-15