1 |
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 07:58 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 12:46 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: |
3 |
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
4 |
> > > On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:49:23 +0100 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò" |
5 |
> > > <flameeyes@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
> > > | Hi everybody, a little question that I'd like to be answered (so that |
7 |
> > > | we can make it a sort of rule). |
8 |
> > > | How should manpages that are generated be managed? |
9 |
> > > | |
10 |
> > > | The common sense and looking to other ebuilds would say to always |
11 |
> > > | build man pages, but when it asks me to install something like |
12 |
> > > | docbook-sgml-utils, I'm tempted not to do that ;) |
13 |
> > > |
14 |
> > > man pages can't be considered optional (despite what RMS says). They're |
15 |
> > > not fancy extra HTML API documentation, they're core, so they don't get |
16 |
> > > a USE flag. |
17 |
> > > |
18 |
> > > Of course, if FEATURES were in the USE expand list, you could use |
19 |
> > > ! features_noman ? ( ) ... |
20 |
> > |
21 |
|
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
> > Except that no{man,info,doc} are on the to-die list anyway. |
25 |
> |
26 |
> They are very valuable features and quite easy to use without mucking |
27 |
> with INSTALL_MASK. I'm against this change without some justification. |
28 |
|
29 |
further investigation shows that you can't simply get rid of these as |
30 |
several core ebuilds use the feature to control the creation of |
31 |
packages. A quick grep shows that several ebuilds do stuff like. |
32 |
has noman FEATURES && do_stuff |
33 |
|
34 |
openssl/glibc/gcc/dhcp/boa/gdb to name a few that take advantage of the |
35 |
no{man,info,doc} FEATURES= already. |
36 |
|
37 |
|
38 |
-- |
39 |
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> |
40 |
Gentoo Linux |
41 |
|
42 |
-- |
43 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |