Is it really so superfluous to have a possibility of
reading all docs from Documentation on a lean box
(e.g. server) without all those xml, flex etc.
printers' toys installed?
Jarek P.
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:42:40 +0200 Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> Is it really so superfluous to have a possibility of
> reading all docs from Documentation on a lean box
> (e.g. server) without all those xml, flex etc.
> printers' toys installed?
make help ==>
Documentation targets:
Linux kernel internal documentation in different formats:
xmldocs (XML DocBook), psdocs (Postscript), pdfdocs (PDF)
htmldocs (HTML), mandocs (man pages, use installmandocs to install)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
and 'man 9 yield'
works for me.
or are you saying that you want large *.txt book-like generated files
instead of larger *.html etc?
---
~Randy
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:41:05AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:42:40 +0200 Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>
> > Is it really so superfluous to have a possibility of
> > reading all docs from Documentation on a lean box
> > (e.g. server) without all those xml, flex etc.
> > printers' toys installed?
>
> make help ==>
>
> Documentation targets:
> Linux kernel internal documentation in different formats:
> xmldocs (XML DocBook), psdocs (Postscript), pdfdocs (PDF)
> htmldocs (HTML), mandocs (man pages, use installmandocs to install)
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> and 'man 9 yield'
> works for me.
>
> or are you saying that you want large *.txt book-like generated files
> instead of larger *.html etc?
I'm saying that I coudn't do it even on knoppix dvd version
(a year ago) and there are gazillions of desktop software
which I don't use.
I only need to read this in any readable form like
the rest of Documentation.
Regards,
Jarek P.
-------------
Slackware_lean_box$ make mandocs
*** You need to install xmlto ***
make[1]: *** [Documentation/DocBook/wanbook.9] Error 1
make: *** [mandocs] Error 2
-------------
http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/fedora/4/i386/xmlto-0.0.18-6.i386.html
Provides
* xmlto
Requires
* /bin/bash
* docbook-dtds
* docbook-xsl
* libc.so.6
* libxslt >= 0.9.0
* passivetex
http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/fedora/4/i386/passivetex-1.25-5.noarch.html
Provides
* passivetex
Requires
* /bin/sh
* /bin/sh
* /bin/sh
* tetex >= 3.0
* xmltex >= 20000118-4
http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/fedora/4/i386/libxslt-1.1.14-2.i386.html
Provides
* libxslt
* libexslt.so.0
* libxslt.so.1
Requires
* /bin/sh
* /bin/sh
* libc.so.6
* libexslt.so.0
* libgcrypt.so.11
* libgpg-error.so.0
* libm.so.6
* libpthread.so.0
* libxml2 >= 2.3.8
* libxml2.so.2
* libxslt.so.1
* libz.so.1
http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/fedora/4/i386/docbook-dtds-1.0-26.noarch.html
Provides
* docbook-dtds
* docbook-dtd-sgml
* docbook-dtd-xml
* docbook-dtd30-sgml
* docbook-dtd31-sgml
* docbook-dtd40-sgml
* docbook-dtd41-sgml
* docbook-dtd412-xml
* docbook-dtd42-sgml
* docbook-dtd42-xml
* docbook-dtd43-sgml
* docbook-dtd43-xml
* docbook-dtd44-sgml
* docbook-dtd44-xml
Requires
* /bin/sh
* /bin/sh
* fileutils
* grep
* libxml2 >= 2.3.8
* openjade = 1.3.2
* perl >= 0:5.002
* sgml-common >= 0.6.3-4
* textutils
* xml-common
* xml-common
etc, etc, etc...
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 09:29:45PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> Doesnt slackware supply a prebuilt package of the kernel docs in various
> formats for just this purpose? From what I can recall, redhat and
> ubuntu both do this.
Maybe does. But do you believe there is anybody reading
this list who uses only distro's prebuilt kernel versions?
Jarek P.
On Thursday 19 October 2006 21:58, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 09:29:45PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> > Doesnt slackware supply a prebuilt package of the kernel docs in
> > various formats for just this purpose? From what I can recall,
> > redhat and ubuntu both do this.
>
> Maybe does. But do you believe there is anybody reading
> this list who uses only distro's prebuilt kernel versions?
>
> Jarek P.
You implied that you were trying to build on a limited resource machine,
and I offered this as an alternative. If you really needed the *very
latest* docs then it would probably be a newish testing platform and
not your main machine, so you could get them of that instead? Anyway
just my 2c.
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 10:14:23PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> On Thursday 19 October 2006 21:58, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 09:29:45PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> > > Doesnt slackware supply a prebuilt package of the kernel docs in
> > > various formats for just this purpose? From what I can recall,
> > > redhat and ubuntu both do this.
> >
> > Maybe does. But do you believe there is anybody reading
> > this list who uses only distro's prebuilt kernel versions?
> >
> > Jarek P.
>
> You implied that you were trying to build on a limited resource machine,
> and I offered this as an alternative. If you really needed the *very
> latest* docs then it would probably be a newish testing platform and
> not your main machine, so you could get them of that instead? Anyway
> just my 2c.
I'm sorry if I implied... It is not a problem of limited resources.
If I can choose I allways tend to install only necessary software.
Thanks for your 2c (they are rarity here!),
Jarek P.
On Thursday 19 October 2006 23:09, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> I'm sorry if I implied... It is not a problem of limited resources.
> If I can choose I allways tend to install only necessary software.
I suppose that certainly helps when chasing bugs. Did you have an
alternative way of building the docs in mind that could be lighter? I
admit the tree you described does seem a large pull just so you can
read some text for one source package... even if it is the kernel.
> Thanks for your 2c (they are rarity here!),
You're welcome
--
Please don't CC messages to me from mailing lists.
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 11:29:07PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> On Thursday 19 October 2006 23:09, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > I'm sorry if I implied... It is not a problem of limited resources.
> > If I can choose I allways tend to install only necessary software.
> I suppose that certainly helps when chasing bugs.
There are also security reasons.
> Did you have an
> alternative way of building the docs in mind that could be lighter? I
> admit the tree you described does seem a large pull just so you can
> read some text for one source package... even if it is the kernel.
Yes. My preferred alternative way is used by
all the rest of Documentation already.
My other preferred alternative way, used by
many programs like apache, postgresql, mysql,
samba etc. is html, which could be read even
on consoles with lynx or links.
If there is a problem of space let it be
accessible in ftp subdirectory at least.
Cheers,
Jarek P.
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 01:16:20PM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
...
> My other preferred alternative way, used by
> many programs like apache, postgresql, mysql,
> samba etc. is html, which could be read even
> on consoles with lynx or links.
>
> If there is a problem of space let it be
> accessible in ftp subdirectory at least.
By the way, I wonder why current versions of
Documentation/DocBook in html are not accessible
from http://www.kernel.org?
Jarek P.
On Friday 20 October 2006 18:30, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> By the way, I wonder why current versions of
> Documentation/DocBook in html are not accessible
> from http://www.kernel.org?
Indeed many other project do this don't they, although from what Ive
seen kernel docs tend to be a bit... untidy?/difficult to navigate?...
for this sort of thing.
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 06:45:17PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> On Friday 20 October 2006 18:30, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > By the way, I wonder why current versions of
> > Documentation/DocBook in html are not accessible
> > from http://www.kernel.org?
>
> Indeed many other project do this don't they, although from what Ive
> seen kernel docs tend to be a bit... untidy?/difficult to navigate?...
> for this sort of thing.
I hope if they were easy accessible more people would
read them and send fixes or supplements.
Jarek P.