es I commited yesterday
> everything is as it was (at least it should be). :)
>
> Anyway, *I* always liked the well-documented configuration files in the early
> releases (2.x), but get used myself to read the manpages instead.
I personally like the documentation, it will never be as complete
Am Mittwoch, 8. Juni 2011, um 18:53:16 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 22:09 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > Hello;
> >
> >
> > in the beginning the shorewall configuration files had an exhaustive
> > documentation including examples.
> >
On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 22:09 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Hello;
>
>
> in the beginning the shorewall configuration files had an exhaustive
> documentation including examples.
>
> Later the documentation has been removed to improve support size-constrained
> distros
Hello;
in the beginning the shorewall configuration files had an exhaustive
documentation including examples.
Later the documentation has been removed to improve support size-constrained
distros like LEAF, and was only available online or in the man-pages (which we
never added to our
On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 19:24 +0100, davidMbrooke wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 19:09 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 21. September 2010, 11:22:49 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> > > On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 23:13 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > > > Am Montag, 20. September 2010, 22:25:18 schr
sciidoc" comes to mind. The first is
> to
> let the developer build buildenv (binutils), the latter to build tinyproxy.
>
>
Possible it'll be good to patch makefiles/configure files to avoid
building of documentation for this
Am Dienstag, 21. September 2010, 22:58:32 schrieb Erich Titl:
> Hi KP
>
> on 21.09.2010 18:15, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 21. September 2010, 17:28:58 schrieb Erich Titl:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> at 20.09.2010 23:13, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> >>> Am Montag, 20. September 2010, 22:25:18 schri
Hi KP
on 21.09.2010 18:15, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 21. September 2010, 17:28:58 schrieb Erich Titl:
>> Hi
>>
>> at 20.09.2010 23:13, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
>>> Am Montag, 20. September 2010, 22:25:18 schrieb davidMbrooke:
Hi,
I have just been working on "Bering-uClibc
On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 19:09 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 21. September 2010, 11:22:49 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> > On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 23:13 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > > Am Montag, 20. September 2010, 22:25:18 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I have just been
Am Dienstag, 21. September 2010, 11:22:49 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 23:13 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > Am Montag, 20. September 2010, 22:25:18 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have just been working on "Bering-uClibc 4.x - Developer Guide" in
> > > the Wiki at
Am Dienstag, 21. September 2010, 17:28:58 schrieb Erich Titl:
> Hi
>
> at 20.09.2010 23:13, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > Am Montag, 20. September 2010, 22:25:18 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I have just been working on "Bering-uClibc 4.x - Developer Guide" in the
> >> Wiki at
> >> https:
Hi
at 20.09.2010 23:13, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Montag, 20. September 2010, 22:25:18 schrieb davidMbrooke:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have just been working on "Bering-uClibc 4.x - Developer Guide" in the
>> Wiki at
>> https://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/leaf/index.php?title=Bering-uClibc_4
>> .x_-_Dev
On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 23:13 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Montag, 20. September 2010, 22:25:18 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have just been working on "Bering-uClibc 4.x - Developer Guide" in the
> > Wiki at
> > https://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/leaf/index.php?title=Bering-uCli
Am Montag, 20. September 2010, 22:25:18 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> Hi,
>
> I have just been working on "Bering-uClibc 4.x - Developer Guide" in the
> Wiki at
> https://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/leaf/index.php?title=Bering-uClibc_4
> .x_-_Developer_Guide
>
> A couple of the pages are direct impo
;
> On Sun, 2010-09-19 at 07:13 -0700, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-09-19 at 14:53 +0100, davidMbrooke wrote:
> > > Thanks Mike & kp,
> > >
> > > I have been developing some ideas on the documentation structure which I
> > > will upload o
quot;discussion" feature to develop ideas on how to structure
the content.
davidMbrooke
On Sun, 2010-09-19 at 07:13 -0700, Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-09-19 at 14:53 +0100, davidMbrooke wrote:
> > Thanks Mike & kp,
> >
> > I have been developing some ideas on
On Sun, 2010-09-19 at 14:53 +0100, davidMbrooke wrote:
> Thanks Mike & kp,
>
> I have been developing some ideas on the documentation structure which I
> will upload once I have edit permission to the Wiki.
David,
Done. The Mediawiki configuration changed a bit.
* David
Thanks Mike & kp,
I have been developing some ideas on the documentation structure which I
will upload once I have edit permission to the Wiki. My preference is to
keep something similar to the structure we get with the DocBook content
(Books, Chapters etc.) and to separate Bering-uClibc
On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 00:24 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 14. September 2010, 21:15:06 schrieb davidMbrooke:
-snip-
> > We will need some new user (and developer?) documentation for
> > Bering-uClibc4, at least to reflect the differences from v3 and
> > preferab
blems I'm using v4 in daily production for weeks
without any major problems.
> We will need some new user (and developer?) documentation for
> Bering-uClibc4, at least to reflect the differences from v3 and
> preferably to improve on what we have already. I would like to voluntee
Shorewall 4.x and excellent IPv6 support are all
> important, and the extra size is not a big problem.
>
> We will need some new user (and developer?) documentation for
> Bering-uClibc4, at least to reflect the differences from v3 and
> preferably to improve on what we have already. I
extra size is not a big problem.
We will need some new user (and developer?) documentation for
Bering-uClibc4, at least to reflect the differences from v3 and
preferably to improve on what we have already. I would like to volunteer
to help with this.
At the moment our master documentation source is
On Sat, 2006-11-25 at 08:56, Tom Eastep wrote:
> Mike Noyes wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 08:48, Mike Noyes wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 07:26, Eric Spakman wrote:
> >>> I don't know, a router/firewall is not really a good platform to read
> >>
Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 08:48, Mike Noyes wrote:
>> On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 07:26, Eric Spakman wrote:
>>> I don't know, a router/firewall is not really a good platform to read
>>> documentation... Maybe Erich's suggestion will work, creating so
Hi KP
KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 23. November 2006 16:16 schrieb Erich Titl:
>
>
> But more important - there is no shorwall.lwp yet!
And given the degree of complexity there may never be :-(
>
>
>> I personally liked the documentation within t
On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 12:21, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 23. November 2006 04:53 schrieb Greg Morgan:
> > Mike Noyes wrote:
> >
> >
> > >> I found one (new?) problem:
> >
> > And yet another problem. I was looking for your excellent introduction
> > to cvs as a developer the other day
KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 23. November 2006 16:16 schrieb Erich Titl:
>
> Hi Erich;
>
>> Hi Folks
>>
>> let me please chime in
>>
>> Mike Noyes wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 01:38, Eric Spakman wrote:
>> >> Ok, but
Am Donnerstag, 23. November 2006 16:16 schrieb Erich Titl:
Hi Erich;
> Hi Folks
>
> let me please chime in
>
> Mike Noyes wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 01:38, Eric Spakman wrote:
> >> Ok, but back to the documentation issue. BU will always use the latest
> >
Am Donnerstag, 23. November 2006 19:42 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 08:48, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 07:26, Eric Spakman wrote:
> > > I don't know, a router/firewall is not really a good platform to read
> > > documentation... Ma
Am Donnerstag, 23. November 2006 04:53 schrieb Greg Morgan:
> Mike Noyes wrote:
>
>
> >> I found one (new?) problem:
>
> And yet another problem. I was looking for your excellent introduction
> to cvs as a developer the other day. Perhaps the SF interface changes
> have broken all the doc manage
Everyone,
Someone that has the time might take a look at XLIFF for LEAF
documentation localization.
http://transolution.python-hosting.com/
http://transolution.python-hosting.com/#xliff-filters
https://open-language-tools.dev.java.net/
--
Mike Noyes
http
On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 08:48, Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 07:26, Eric Spakman wrote:
> > I don't know, a router/firewall is not really a good platform to read
> > documentation... Maybe Erich's suggestion will work, creating some sort of
> > webconf p
On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 07:26, Eric Spakman wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> >
> > Eric,
> > Ah. We are in agreement then, or I think so. Do you still plan on a
> > "shordoc" package?
> >
> I don't know, a router/firewall is not really a good platform to
Hi Mike,
>
> Eric,
> Ah. We are in agreement then, or I think so. Do you still plan on a
> "shordoc" package?
>
I don't know, a router/firewall is not really a good platform to read
documentation... Maybe Erich's suggestion will work, creating some sort of
webco
Hi Folks
let me please chime in
Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 01:38, Eric Spakman wrote:
>> Ok, but back to the documentation issue. BU will always use the latest
>> stable shorewall version and even with an older version of BU it shouldn't
>> be a big probl
On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 06:50, Eric Spakman wrote:
> Hello Mike,
> >
> >> Ok, but back to the documentation issue. BU will always use the latest
> >> stable shorewall version and even with an older version of BU it
> >> shouldn't be a big problem to u
Hello Mike,
>
>> Ok, but back to the documentation issue. BU will always use the latest
>> stable shorewall version and even with an older version of BU it
>> shouldn't be a big problem to update to the latest shorewall (especially
>> 3.0
>> onwards). Why du
On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 01:38, Eric Spakman wrote:
> Ok, but back to the documentation issue. BU will always use the latest
> stable shorewall version and even with an older version of BU it shouldn't
> be a big problem to update to the latest shorewall (especially 3.0
> onwards).
Hi Paul,
>>
>>>> What troubles me more is that Tom updates the documentation on his
>>>> site to represent the state of the art in shorewall v5, and the
>>>> currently shipping versions of LEAF or BU are using shorewall v3,
>>>> ou
Eric Spakman wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
>>> What troubles me more is that Tom updates the documentation on his site
>>> to represent the state of the art in shorewall v5, and the currently
>>> shipping versions of LEAF or BU are using shorewall v3, our
>>> d
Hi Paul,
>> What troubles me more is that Tom updates the documentation on his site
>> to represent the state of the art in shorewall v5, and the currently
>> shipping versions of LEAF or BU are using shorewall v3, our
>> documentation will not match the code we'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Noyes wrote:
>> I found one (new?) problem:
And yet another problem. I was looking for your excellent introduction
to cvs as a developer the other day. Perhaps the SF interface changes
have broken all the doc manager stuff. For example, the
only possible if you're using DocBook XML
> >>> to generate man pages, and the docbook xml source is
> >>> available via uri.
> >> The only problem with that idea that I can think of, is that it
> >> vulnerable to Tom changing URLs or updating the d
ource is
> > available via uri.
>
> The only problem with that idea that I can think of, is that it
> vulnerable to Tom changing URLs or updating the documentation for
> Shorewall while we have not updated or changed ours.
Paul,
A broken XInclude would fail validation. It shouldn
that I can think of, is that it
vulnerable to Tom changing URLs or updating the documentation for
Shorewall while we have not updated or changed ours.
Up to you.
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Jo
On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 14:39, Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 09:10, Paul Traina wrote:
> > Mike Noyes wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 11:30, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > >> We have a location in cvs for man pages, and output them daily for our
> > >>
On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 09:09, Paul Traina wrote:
> Mike Noyes wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 10:22, Tom Eastep wrote:
> >> The documentation contained in Shorewall configuration files has always
> >> presented an upgrade dilema for users: "Do I spend time merging
On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 09:10, Paul Traina wrote:
> Mike Noyes wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 11:30, Mike Noyes wrote:
> >> We have a location in cvs for man pages, and output them daily for our
> >> documentation build. All someone needs to do is add them to our
>
Hi Mike;
Am Montag, 20. November 2006 23:52 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 11:18, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 08:16, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > > That's what I get fort trying something quick. The HOWTO and Reference
> > > sections are missing from our TOC now. :-(
> >
> >
dations
for sections, but they won't affect us.
> I remember we did have a usable documentation some time ago without giving
> every section an ID.
We had the generic auto-generated docbook filenames for most chapters.
The ones with ID attributes use(d) use.id.as.filenam
he LEAF "Bering" distribution ?
> ID recommended on section: Why Bering ?
> Writing bk01ch01s02.html for section
> ID recommended on section: Feedback
[deleted a very long list of similar entries]
Mike,
is adding an ID to every section _required_ or recommended when writ
On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 08:16, Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 08:02, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 07:42, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > > I modified /home/groups/l/le/leaf/admin/doc-build.sh, and added:
> > >
> > > --stringparam chunk.section.depth 0 \
>
> > One more quic
On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 08:06, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Freitag, 3. November 2006 16:42 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> >
> > I modified /home/groups/l/le/leaf/admin/doc-build.sh, and added:
> >
> > --stringparam chunk.section.depth 0 \
> > --stringparam use.id.as.filename 1 \
> >
> >
On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 08:02, Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 07:42, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > I modified /home/groups/l/le/leaf/admin/doc-build.sh, and added:
> >
> > --stringparam chunk.section.depth 0 \
> One more quick hack.
>
>--stringparam toc.section.depth 0 \
>
Am Freitag, 3. November 2006 16:42 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 06:54, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 12:04, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 11:34, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > > > Am Donnerstag, 2. November 2006 15:24 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> > > > > The main i
On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 07:42, Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 06:54, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 12:04, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 11:34, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > > > Am Donnerstag, 2. November 2006 15:24 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> > > > > The main issue is
On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 06:54, Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 12:04, Mike Noyes wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 11:34, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > > Am Donnerstag, 2. November 2006 15:24 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> > > > The main issue is an inability to use.id.as.filename. Generic chunking
> >
write doc's (esp. if one's native
> > > > language isn't english) - and a lot of people tried hard to provide
> > > > guides and howto's to alleviate the usage of LEAF appliances and to
> > > > teach new developers about the LEAF specifics.
&
x27;t english) - and a lot of people tried hard to provide
> > > guides and howto's to alleviate the usage of LEAF appliances and to
> > > teach new developers about the LEAF specifics.
> > > But as the documentation page presents itself to the users t
t; howto's
> > to alleviate the usage of LEAF appliances and to teach new developers about
> > the LEAF specifics.
> > But as the documentation page presents itself to the users today, all of
> > the
> > work is nearly useless. Even die-hard LEAF users do have
On Mon, 2006-10-16 at 11:25, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Hello Mike;
>
> are you still around?
KP,
Yes.
> I'm getting more and more annoyed by the fact that I'm waiting for more than
> a
> year to see the documentation pages in a readable state - see
>
Hello Mike;
are you still around?
I'm getting more and more annoyed by the fact that I'm waiting for more than a
year to see the documentation pages in a readable state - see
http://leaf.sourceforge.net/doc/
It's really hard to design and write doc's (esp. if one'
On Mon, 2004-02-02 at 08:40, K.-P. KirchdÃrfer wrote:
> They should be still at the same place; but it seems the URL is on another
> server, which is unavailable from time to time (and pretty often, I agree).
K.-P.,
Nope. Same server. It's just the main record on SF for our project.
Main dom
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Brian K. Boonstra (brianboonstra)
Assigned to: Jacques Nilo (jnilo)
Summary: (ucLibC v2B3) Update documentation of PPPOE
Initial Comment:
I noticed that the instructions for PPPOE configuration in
the user's guide still make referen
> Hi Jacques,
> in bipack1.html you reference a
> http://leaf.sf.net/devel/jnilo/manpages/pppdman.html
> That is good, but the pppdman.html refers to
> return to main contents
> chat, chat, tcpdump, syslog.conf, tcpdump, pppdump and man2html
> they all refer to localhost something and fail to find
Hi Jacques,
in bipack1.html you reference a
http://leaf.sf.net/devel/jnilo/manpages/pppdman.html
That is good, but the pppdman.html refers to
return to main contents
chat, chat, tcpdump, syslog.conf, tcpdump, pppdump and man2html
they all refer to localhost something and fail to find the desired fi
Mike Noyes wrote:
> Greg,
> I've recommended DocBook XML for over a year. The move to 4.2 is
> interesting, but I'd like to see other projects start using it first.
LOL. So what you're telling me is that I finally have a clue as to what
you were talking about. So DocBook XML 4.1, then?
Greg Mo
ags sounds
> like a nice Emacs feature, but I wouldn't choose the tool on its DTD
> parsing alone. I do not believe you have to be flexible here. I
> believe the problem LDP and Gnome documentation have is that they have
> existed for some time. Hence, much of the work is writte
SGML only shows valid tags at a particular point
> > in the document.
>
> Maybe I should try Emacs again.
I was thinking about this post the other day. The list of tags sounds
like a nice Emacs feature, but I wouldn't choose the tool on its DTD
parsing alone. I do not believe you
id,
FreeBSD should have full support for DocBook XML.
FreeBSD Documentation Project
http://www.freebsd.org/docproj/
Real nice flow chart for DocBook
http://people.freebsd.org/~nik/sgmlxml.gif
> > I prefer XEmacs+psgml.
>
> Problem with Emacs is 1) it takes up too much space;
Agree
=301 % movement in
tags?
http://vim.sourceforge.net/tips/tip.php?script_id=90 cvs interface
http://vim.sourceforge.net/tips/tip.php?script_id=164 html macros
http://vim.sourceforge.net/tips/tip.php?script_id=258 html macros
http://vim.sourceforge.net/tips/tip.php?script_id=30 python
http://developer.gnome.org
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 11:28:28AM -0700, Mike Noyes wrote:
> Recent versions of Abiword will read RTF and export to DocBook XML.
Excellent! I've Abiword in several places (both FreeBSD and Linux I think).
> > It sounds like the usual way is to edit DocBook using text editors
> > like Emacs an
On Wed, 2002-08-21 at 08:23, David Douthitt wrote:
> Then there's a RTF-to-DocBook converter - but it isn't free.
David,
Recent versions of Abiword will read RTF and export to DocBook XML.
Gnome Office
http://www.gnome.org/gnome-office/abiword.shtml
> It sounds like the usual way is to edit Doc
okPackages
Here is a link containing a list of XML editors.
http://www.xmlsoftware.com/editors.html
XML parsers
http://www.xmlsoftware.com/parsers.html
XSLT processors
http://www.xmlsoftware.com/xslt.html
Please review my earlier post for DTD, XSL style sheet, and authoring
template recommendations.
On Wed, 2002-08-21 at 08:23, David Douthitt wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 03:27:30PM +0100, Julian Church wrote:
> > >I see that DocBook (v3.1) exists for Red Hat 6.2; will this
> > >be sufficient? Do I have to upgrade? Will new versions work
> > >on Red Hat 6.2?
> >
> > I'm sure they will -
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 03:27:30PM +0100, Julian Church wrote:
> I've been working on converting your Developers' Guide
> to Docbook for a while now.
I knew that; the reason I brought this up was that I've
plans to overhaul the document and to rework it, and I wanted
to follow the standard LEAF
On Wed, 2002-08-21 at 07:27, Julian Church wrote:
> Hi David
>
> At 08:48 21/08/02 -0500, David Douthitt wrote:
> >I've decided I need to revisit the LEAF Developer's Guide,
> >and want to know what I need to do to make it ready for
> >this "DocBook" format.
>
> I've been working on converting y
Hi David
At 08:48 21/08/02 -0500, David Douthitt wrote:
>I've decided I need to revisit the LEAF Developer's Guide,
>and want to know what I need to do to make it ready for
>this "DocBook" format.
I've been working on converting your Developers' Guide to Docbook for a
while now. I've got a Doc
you.
[Leaf-devel] Converting Documentation to DocBook - progress report
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg05220.html
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 11:55:30PM -0700, Greg Morgan wrote:
> > Mike Noyes wrote quoting Julian Church:
>
> > > The normal
I've decided I need to revisit the LEAF Developer's Guide,
and want to know what I need to do to make it ready for
this "DocBook" format.
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 11:55:30PM -0700, Greg Morgan wrote:
> Mike Noyes wrote quoting Julian Church:
> > The normal formats are: html, pdf, plain text, and
Mike Noyes wrote:
>The two missing graphics are
> now in our CVS repository, and they successfully exported this morning.
Mike, thanks for your continued hard work keeping the site afloat.
Greg Morgan
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by: O
On Sat, 2002-08-17 at 02:01, Greg Morgan wrote:
> The Richard J. Lohman guide
> "Creating a Firewall Using EigerStein" is missing several images.
Greg,
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. The two missing graphics are
now in our CVS repository, and they successfully exported this morning.
h
On Sat, 2002-08-17 at 02:01, Greg Morgan wrote:
> Mike Noyes wrote:
> > daily.sh crontab shell script (feedback on this script is appreciated)
> > http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/leaf/devel/mhnoyes/sf-admin/
>
> I didn't see anything wrong with daily.sh.
Greg,
It ran without incid
Mike Noyes wrote:
> Greg & Julian,
> Here is what we're doing currently for our guides.
>
> DocBook XML source is generated and placed in our cvs repository.
> Generated xhtml, plain text, pdf, and PostScript versions are placed
> in cvs with the DocBook XML source. They are then expo
On Fri, 2002-08-16 at 01:25, Julian Church wrote:
> At 07:47 15/08/02 -0700, Mike Noyes wrote:
> >LDP Author Guide
> >http://tldp.org/LDP/LDP-Author-Guide/index.html
>
> Many thanks for that - it's got a lot of info, and links to loads more. I
> was aware of th
On Fri, 2002-08-16 at 06:46, Mike Noyes wrote:
> daily.sh crontab shell script (feedback on this script is appreciated)
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/leaf/devel/mhnoyes/sf-admin/
Everyone,
I just added a crontab entry for daily.sh. It will run daily at 1:15 AM
PST/PDT.
--
Mik
On Fri, 2002-08-16 at 02:11, Julian Church wrote:
> At 23:55 15/08/02 -0700, Greg Morgan wrote:
> >Perhaps then the question is how can documents be checked in via cvs,
> >then deployed on the leaf site? I don't know all that you can do with
> >SF, but is this possible?
>
> Does anyone know what
eletal docbook
>file.
Suitable skeletal files are available at the linux documentation project
http://www.tldp.org/authors/index.html#resources - there's a lot of other
useful stuff here (Thanks Mike Noyes for alerting me to this area of tldp).
>Perhaps then the question is how can documen
e/index.html
Many thanks for that - it's got a lot of info, and links to loads more. I
was aware of the Linux Documentation Project, but didn't realise how well
organised it was. It's nice to have a framework like that to work in.
cheers
Juli
Mike Noyes wrote quoting Julian Church:
> Date: 15 Aug 2002 07:47:13 -0700
>
> On Fri, 2002-07-12 at 08:10, Julian Church wrote:
> > I've a few questions.
>
> > 2. The DocBook documents will need converting to other more usable formats
> > for distribution/posting on the site. I know XML is su
On Fri, 2002-07-12 at 08:10, Julian Church wrote:
> I've a few questions.
Julian,
I apologize for the severe lag in responding to your post.
> 1. What should I do about version numbering? I've been careful not to
> change the text in any substantial way so going all the way from 1.2 to 1.3
>
Hi All
I've been getting on quite nicely with converting David Douhitt's
developers guide to DocBook XML - almost finished now.
I hit a few snags getting a decent XML/Docbook development environment
together. I'll spare you the long story - suffice to say this has taught
me as much about Mac
At 01:50 PM 6/26/02 +0200, Eric Wolzak wrote:
>
>To answer a few questions.
>The lrpkg.back.script is name dependent.
>With the usual *.list etc is a include and exclude file list created.
>Before the create and compress the tar file command is executed, there is
a statement
>like
>If the name
Hello SImon, Kim and others on this thread.
First of all sorry for the late response of the "bering crew". Jacques is out of town
for the
rest of this week, and I just ended a 24 Hr shift , so i wasn't able to read the mails.
To answer a few questions.
The lrpkg.back.script is name dependent.
W
> > Was this on a RC3 or a RC2 machine?
> > If it was on RC3 can somebody of the bering crew confirm that
> > something changed in the backupscript the fix the problem I had
> > with backing up under RC2.
>
>Both - but in both cases you have to tell lrcfg.back.initrd the size of
>the initrd to ma
Hi Kim
On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 03:05:38PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Aanhalen Simon Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >
> > Really? It worked for me - the packages out the far end were perfectly
> > backupable. I fail to see what temporary name you give your image
> > while
> > you populate
Aanhalen Simon Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Really? It worked for me - the packages out the far end were perfectly
> backupable. I fail to see what temporary name you give your image
> while
> you populate it important - what is crucial is that at the end of the
> process, the image must be g
Hi Kim
On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 08:05:42AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Aanhalen Simon Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> > >
> > > We will create an initrd.lrp package that can be backed up without a
> > glitch.
> >
> > No, it won't - there's a gzip process that has to be gone through in
>
Oops forgot to include the list sorry.
This way there will be a record in the mail archives
Aanhalen Simon Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
It looks nice, but as mentioned in the previous mail it just needs
the changed filename. A replace all initrd-new.img to initrd.lrp will fix
everything.
I will
Aanhalen Simon Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
It looks nice, but as mentioned in the previous mail it just needs
the changed filename. A replace all initrd-new.img to initrd.lrp will fix
everything.
I will quote a mail from Eric Wolzak member of the Bering crew which
apparently never made it to t
1 - 100 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
