| 1 |
On Thu, 2023-01-19 at 13:25 +0200, Cedric Sodhi wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> In this case, the expectation to compile manpages does not come free |
| 4 |
> of cost and protects noone. By the above formulation, the cost |
| 5 |
> "should" not come in the form of additional (heavy! dev-python/sphinx |
| 6 |
> and deps are 75M) dependencies, but instead in the form of additional |
| 7 |
> work for the maintainer. One way to annoy less-enthusiastic (proxy-) |
| 8 |
> maintainers, in my opinion. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I think "protects noone" is overstating it. If your network is broken, |
| 12 |
the man pages might be your only troubleshooting resource. It would |
| 13 |
suck to find that (say) net-wireless/iwd introduced a new USE=man flag |
| 14 |
a few weeks ago and now you can't get connected to some weird |
| 15 |
conference wifi and are unable to google for help. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Something like USE=noman would be nicer for users, but IIRC we have a |
| 18 |
policy against them (flags with a "no" prefix). Setting a global |
| 19 |
USE="+man" default also creates some headaches in our "user interface." |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
OTOH I do agree it would be nice if we had a way to disable them if you |
| 22 |
very explicitly ask for it. Sphinx (the example in bug 890589) is |
| 23 |
obnoxious, and if you're going to strip the man pages with something |
| 24 |
like FEATURES=noman on an embedded system -- or if you just don't care |
| 25 |
about those particular man pages -- then it would be great if you could |
| 26 |
not build them in the first place. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
The best of both worlds would be if someone could convince upstream to |
| 29 |
generate them during their "make dist" process. |
Archives