1 |
Steve Long wrote: |
2 |
> Kent Fredric wrote: |
3 |
>>> ++ I was only thinking of the programmer:user difference, since code |
4 |
>>> docs tend to pull in a lot of stuff, where as end-user docs are normally |
5 |
>>> supplied in an easier format (eg not dox ;) rebuild-docs as a one-shot |
6 |
>>> flag is great. |
7 |
>>> |
8 |
>>> Would there be a way to control what kind of markup is output (assuming |
9 |
>>> a package supports it)? For example, to specify that files should be for |
10 |
>>> text-only or graphical browser (where both would be the default.) XeTeX |
11 |
>>> -- PS -- PDF is another along those lines. |
12 |
>> |
13 |
>> I can just feel a USE expansion coming on. |
14 |
>> |
15 |
>> DOC="none pdf txt man ps html info all rebuild" sounds like just a |
16 |
>> bunch for starters. |
17 |
>> |
18 |
>> Any votees? |
19 |
>> |
20 |
> Not me, I'm afraid, unless this is the only way to do it.. I agree that |
21 |
> they should only apply to single packages, not across the tree. Although, |
22 |
> if I'm honest, I don't know what that breaks. |
23 |
> |
24 |
Hmm I've been thinking on this a bit more, and I think it does generalise |
25 |
well in user terms. After all, if I want documents in text only format for |
26 |
an installation, it applies to all packages. |
27 |
|
28 |
What concerned me more was 1) whether it would expand to all by default, as |
29 |
other expansions do (not so major with profiles perhaps?) and 2) being able |
30 |
to override if we do want eg html for a package we develop with. But |
31 |
according to ivanm, you can override with package.use e.g. linguas_en_gb so |
32 |
long as you know the prefix (ie doc_). |
33 |
|
34 |
So consider that a positive vote from me :) Though I must stress I want tex |
35 |
in there ;) |
36 |
|
37 |
Useful tip btw: |
38 |
<ivanm> if you have udept emerged, then doing dep -u <package name> will |
39 |
tell you _all_ the use vars, including the expanded ones |
40 |
|
41 |
|
42 |
-- |
43 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |