On Sun, 30 May 2010 13:22:55 +0200 christophe.ja...@ouvaton.org wrote: > Quoting Karl Goetz <k...@kgoetz.id.au>: > > > > Are you planning to provide fixed packages for the entire program > > (eg, a new gcc package), or just a deb of the doco to sit beside it? > > > Just a deb for the doco. > > I think I will make a meta-package called `gnu-doc' having > `binutils-doc' and the like as dependencies. That way, Richard will > be able to have all GNU doc with one command, while people working > with, say `gawk', will only have to install `gawk-doc'.
i'd say just stick it in one package. we'll provide binutils/emacs/gawk
by default, so it won't hurt people to have the doco.
> Do you think I better have to work on files from:
> - `apt-get source $SOFTWARE-doc' from metad,
> - or source files from gnu.org (metad version number)?
gnu.org doco - debians may not even match the version shipped.
> >> Given those informations, do you think I better have to just edit
> >> the script to copy html files and directory recursively from
> >> {binutils,gcc,gdb} website to a directory of the user calling the
> >> script? In this case, in which user's directory should I copy this
> >> html doc?
> >
> > I would suggest putting the info files in a bzr repo, and not
> > scraping off the html.
>
> binutils, gcc and gdb info files are already on
> http://bzr.savannah.org/r/gnewsense/docs.
nice.
kk
--
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ gNewSense-dev mailing list gNewSense-dev@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-dev
