| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
At 12 Jul 2003 09:42:39 +0100, |
| 4 |
Alastair Tse wrote: |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> Also, it seems to me that the "doc" USE flag is too encompassing. It is |
| 7 |
> used for both installing user documentation (user guides, application |
| 8 |
> user help) and also to install developer documentation (APIs, |
| 9 |
> programming tutorials, Javadoc, etc). I think we should have a "devdoc" |
| 10 |
> USE flag to differentiate between the two. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I agree. It would be better to turn on/off doc installation with "doc" |
| 13 |
USE flag (even though it is a user documentation, some may not want to |
| 14 |
install any documentation at all). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Also I suggest that we would better have "man" USE flag to decide |
| 17 |
whether we will install man pages or not (defaults to turn on). |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
However, this "man" USE flag raises one question -- how should we deal |
| 20 |
with i18n man pages? I've almost translated portage man into Japanese, |
| 21 |
but don't know where to ask. I think there are three options: |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
1. put it into app-i18n/manpages-ja, together with other Japanese |
| 24 |
man pages |
| 25 |
2. create app-i18n/gentoo-manpages-ja and put portage (and possibly |
| 26 |
gentoolkit) man pages into it |
| 27 |
3. put it into sys-apps/portage and create <lang> USE flag to |
| 28 |
determine which man pages to install |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
The problem in the first option is that if we install manpages-<lang>, |
| 31 |
we have to install all the man pages in it regardless of what |
| 32 |
applications we use (eg. we have to install NIS/NFS man pages even when |
| 33 |
we don't install them). Currently German, Spanish, French and Russian |
| 34 |
have their own man pages in app-i18n, but none of them has portage |
| 35 |
man pages translated. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
And if we take the second option (originally nakano suggested me this |
| 38 |
option) we will have both manpages-ja and gentoo-manpages-ja, which, |
| 39 |
in my point of view, does not look nice. However, if we separate |
| 40 |
gentoo-manpages-<lang> from manpages-<lang>, we can keep |
| 41 |
gentoo-manpages-<lang> up to date pretty easily. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Lastly, if we are to have <lang> USE flag and "man" USE flag, we |
| 44 |
should modify /usr/lib/portage/bin/*man to handle i18nised man pages. |
| 45 |
If we have USE="ja man", Japanese man pages will be installed in |
| 46 |
addition to standard man pages. I think this is the most "gentooish" way |
| 47 |
of dealing with i18n, but the problem is we need to split |
| 48 |
manpages-<lang> into individual ebuilds. Of course it takes a lot of |
| 49 |
time and efforts, and it will get complicated to manage i18n man pages |
| 50 |
(though we needn't care about it in each ebuild, as it is hidden in |
| 51 |
portage helper scripts shown above). Suppose there is an update of |
| 52 |
translated man pages but no change in original source, should we change |
| 53 |
the revision number so that people who turn the USE flag on can get |
| 54 |
the benefit of it (the most non-<lang> speaker will not get any |
| 55 |
advantage from it but be forced to recompile it) ? |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Any comments? |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
regards, |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
-- |
| 62 |
Mamoru KOMACHI <usata@g.o> |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
-- |
| 65 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives