On 2/25/2014 2:20 PM, Pierre Labastie wrote: > Rev 12783 has reverted what I had done for guile. I am curious why: > > I had suppressed instructions for building pdf docs (using texlive!), and > simplified instructions to build and install html and txt doc, but had not > changed anything else (I had tested that with a DESTDIR install). It is really > curious to insist to put pdf doc installation instructions in the book, which > almost nobody will use (you need X and a pdf reader to see them, and by the > time you have that, you almost certainly have a browser and can read the html > doc). Anyway, all the docs come from the same texinfo files, and building pdf > docs is very standard anyway (once you have tex). Furthermore, it seems to me > that it is more educational to show how to use the configure machinery to have > the doc land into the correct dirs, instead of manually creating those and > copying the files into them.
Though I strongly disagree with your decision to remove the docs, the more important part of your commit is removing the work done by another editor without discussion. Another editor went to the trouble of adding the instructions to build and install the docs, and you just decide to remove it because you don't use pdf docs. Strange indeed! There is a whole slew of places in BLFS where extra docs are created and installed, but you remove the ones from the Guile instructions. You do realize the users have the option of not installing those docs, right? In fact, by removing those instructions you are reverting work that I did long ago. Makes no sense! -- Randy -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
