[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: doc compilations: build-time or pre-built?

On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 04:45:21PM -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 07:25:16PM -0300, marciotex@gmail.com wrote:
> >> 1) compile docs pre-build-time; or
> >> 2)  compile docs in build-time
> > 
> > Definitely the latter. We build stuff at build time for a reason,
> > architecture-specific or -independent alike.
> Is this the consensus/best-practice on this question?
> It seems like it would be quite taxing on the autobuilders to have to pull
> something like docbook (and its chain of dependencies) into a pbuilder just
> to recompile a manpage that doesn't change between architectures.

autobuilders don't use pbuilder :-)

> I'm interested in this because I've typically done (2), but have recently
> started to think that (1) is more appropriate, particularly for packages
> where the documentation is a simple manpage.

That's not the issue. If someone updates the code for a local change,
then the sgml source file of the manpage, they want to be able to use
"dpkg-buildpackage" to produce a working package with the included

Pulling in docbook isn't really much of a problem; if many packages
start doing it, we can easily preinstall that particular package in the
buildd chroot (e.g., I do this for debhelper already on my buildd

Fun will now commence
  -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: