Denis Mugnier wrote: > On 08/07/13 13:27, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >> Denis Mugnier wrote: >>> On 08/07/13 03:19, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >>>> Ken Moffat wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 07:16:46PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >>>>>> I'm generally OK with it, but we need to come up with a strategy for the >>>>>> Perl modules. I generally use cpan -i<Module1::Name> for those and we >>>>>> don't want that repeated in every section. There are 13 separate >>>>>> modules listed and it seems like it would make for 13 very short pages. >>>>> Installing from cpan is great if what you want to do is pull in the >>>>> dependencies automatically. I've done it myself, on occasion. But >>>>> I think most LFS users are sufficiently anal to want to know what is >>>>> pulled in - for that, running the commands by hand is the way to go, >>>>> is it not ? >>>> There is output of exactly what is being done: dependencies, build, >>>> test, install. All you have to do is use tee and direct to a file. >>> My proposal is just to split the xml files, not the html rendering. One >>> xml file is one module, but all modules are on >>> the same page in the book. >>> My goal is to simplify the xml, but not to change the organisation of >>> the BLFS book ;o). >>> >>> If you apply my patch, you can see that the python-modules page is the >>> same in the HTML rendering. >> OK, I see what you did. I withdraw my objection.
> So can I do the others splits ? Yes. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
