Re: dhelp exposure
Chris Waters wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 08:18:19PM -0500, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
>
> > Of course, all of this would require that the packages in question
> > depend on dhelp
>
> As a dwww user, I can't say I'm thrilled with that suggestion! :-)
>
> I'd rather see the packages in question depend on doc-base (which in
> turn depends on dhelp|dwww), and have the packages in question use
> whichever of dhelp or dwww is installed (or even both if both are).
> Might be a little more work, but it'd be well worth it in my opinion.
> That's the whole reason behind having doc-base, as far as I can see.
Huh? I'm confused.
I think it would be a lot more work. For example, Christian just sent me a very
simple symlink suggestion which would link the dhelp starting page from
/usr/share/gnome/help/debian/C. But this would make gnome-help depend on dhelp.
I don't see how this little trick would work with dwww (unless one is on Hurd
and can make a symlink into an http vfs filename...). You could, I suppose,
have postinst check for dhelp/dwww and install symlinks or bookmarks as
appropriate, but if a user *later* installed dhelp/dwww or switched from one to
the other, the links would be obsolete.
There's no conflict between dhelp and dwww, and as I said, dhelp adds
*very* little overhead (on PPC, Installed-Size is 123K vs. 180 for dwww). How
does doc-base help one to do what I'd like to here?
> Don't *make* me release a version of orbit that Depends: dwww,
> Conflicts: dhelp! :-)
So orbit has an HTML browser??
I'm not sure you understand my intentions: I want to make web and help browsers
present the dhelp (or dwww) main page to users, to help them to find system
documentation more easily. I don't understand what this has to do with orbit,
which just registers its documentation...
This is all still wishlist of course, but please clarify.
-Adam P.
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6
Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe!
Reply to: