| 1 |
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 20:01:04 +0100 |
| 2 |
Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > If you really, genuinely think you have a case for compression of |
| 4 |
> > docs, backed up with statistics showing that it's a relevant change, |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I fail to see why you need statistics for something that is clearly a |
| 7 |
> waste of space, but this could be a start: |
| 8 |
> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_9018a9f64cd32ba85494887ffe3edf78.xml |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Because if you look at the statistics, it's pretty obvious that it's a |
| 11 |
stupid idea. If you've got USE=doc, somewhere around 4% of managed |
| 12 |
files are in /usr/share/doc, and once you take inode sizes into |
| 13 |
account, you can knock that down to about 3% -- and this is for people |
| 14 |
who are already turning on a use flag that wouldn't be on on |
| 15 |
space-relevant systems. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> > then you should write a proposal for future EAPIs for handling it, |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> I don't understand why something that has been there for ages has to |
| 20 |
> die. For what I've seen, the major (and only) problem with prepalldocs |
| 21 |
> is its definition and I'm sure we can find one that everybody will |
| 22 |
> agree with. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Because killing it is better than keeping it. It's solving an |
| 25 |
irrelevant problem the wrong way. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> > and you should do it in such a way that it works automatically for |
| 28 |
> > all ebuilds, without any developer intervention (but providing some |
| 29 |
> > way for ebuilds to disable it where necessary). |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> This is probably a good start: |
| 32 |
> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_eb1f7952eb2f0fe725bde331a4d9ae30.xml |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Can you demonstrate that it's even remotely useful? |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives