Re: documentation types
On Feb 10, Hendrik Sattler (ubq7@stud.uni-karlsruhe.de) wrote:
> Am Freitag, 10. Februar 2006 13:36 schrieb Neil Roeth:
> > On Feb 10, Hendrik Sattler (post@hendrik-sattler.de) wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I about packaging a library that ships an API reference in docbook SGML
> > > and provides manual build targets for PDF, PS and HTML.
> > >
> > > Is there any preference on which type should be included in the -dev
> > > package? I would prefer PDF:
> > > * one file only
> > > * easy to print
> > > * many viewers available
> > >
> > > I would rather not build all three as this is a definite waste of disk
> > > space.
> > >
> > > Suggestions are welcome...
> >
> > Could it be a configure option, so that the first time the package is
> > installed it would ask which subset of the three to install (defaulting to
> > PDF only), and later, when upgrading the package, it would install the same
> > subset with no further interaction?
>
> That would surely be possible with debconf but a Depends on docbook-utils and
> all its dependecies would be required.
> Would it be acceptable for a package to tell in its README.Debian how to
> create the files? Then, docbook-utils could be a Suggests.
I was thinking that all three formats would be pregenerated and in the binary
package, and only the one(s) desired would be installed. So, no need to
Depend on docbook-utils. But, policy says HTML is preferred, so I guess this
is moot.
--
Neil Roeth
Reply to: