On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 07:58 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 12:46 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:49:23 +0100 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > | Hi everybody, a little question that I'd like to be answered (so that
> > > | we can make it a sort of rule).
> > > | How should manpages that are generated be managed?
> > > |
> > > | The common sense and looking to other ebuilds would say to always
> > > | build man pages, but when it asks me to install something like
> > > | docbook-sgml-utils, I'm tempted not to do that ;)
> > >
> > > man pages can't be considered optional (despite what RMS says). They're
> > > not fancy extra HTML API documentation, they're core, so they don't get
> > > a USE flag.
> > >
> > > Of course, if FEATURES were in the USE expand list, you could use
> > > ! features_noman ? ( ) ...
> >
> > Except that no{man,info,doc} are on the to-die list anyway.
>
> They are very valuable features and quite easy to use without mucking
> with INSTALL_MASK. I'm against this change without some justification.
further investigation shows that you can't simply get rid of these as
several core ebuilds use the feature to control the creation of
packages. A quick grep shows that several ebuilds do stuff like.
has noman FEATURES && do_stuff
openssl/glibc/gcc/dhcp/boa/gdb to name a few that take advantage of the
no{man,info,doc} FEATURES= already.
--
Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
