-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2011-01-06 01:04, Russ Allbery wrote: > Niels Thykier <[email protected]> writes: > >> [...] >> Do you think this would work, or would it be better just to keep this >> information static in the pod file and manually update it? > > I vote for this -- please go ahead! >
Done. I made some changes to the script so it tries to highlight paths, and substitutes a few html tags (which were already used in the desc files). It also does manpage link substitution: <tt>Text</tt> => I<Text> <b>Text</b> => B<Text> <i>Text</i> => I<Text> Text(N) => L<Text(N)> I am not sure if there is a better replacement for <tt>, I have only used I,B,C and L in pod. It also have a few hard-coded "keywords", but I think it would actually be better to just remove those and html-tag the relevant parts in desc files. Mostly because the script is not smart enough to realise that it should not highlight the keyword in all cases (i.e. if it is in a path name). Some of the info fields are slightly different from the old manpages entry on them. Cruft to mention an example: Old: Looks for cruft in source packages, like files of version control systems and temporary files from the build process. New: This looks for cruft in Debian packaging or upstream source Honestly I am not sure which of them is better. If you find an entry in the new manpage that you find inadequate, feel free to update it (or ask me to do it). Finally some of the highlighting has changed. In the checks/collection sections most of this is related to the old manpage being inconsistent. But pod2man also highlights some things differently in general (e.g. links are underlined instead of bold). > In fact, I think it would be fine to go a step further and do this POD > generation automatically as part of the build (rather than requiring > running the script in private/ manually). The reason why most of the > scripts in private aren't run automatically is because they rely on > network resources and other information that isn't available to a buildd > or in a chroot build environment for the package build, but that isn't the > case for this. > That was my intention all along to generate them during build. After all we build from source in Debian ;) > I'm ambivalent over whether the script should be moved out of private > since it isn't quite the same case as the scripts in private that are only > intended to be run manually. (private is kind of a weird name for the > directory anyway.) > I just dumped it there because it does not really belong in any of the other directories and creating a "build-helpers" directory seem like overkill. ~Niels -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJNJZe9AAoJEAVLu599gGRCxCoP/0DxMK8iJSlj6a62GK1zaM6F TNsUd8RoB6Hq1PMWQC+q0TUMOU1/TqTsIVAfU+t7RSky++jgnATBW9DaJsTHK9/p TUVIyPu1hT0tu4UkNWE2QNdA5Qal4BRSNYgPm+7yZIuXsbQqCKXDGzrOl/Tb8db7 9oke1lFaREwoSRX7tirfwPYCVF6Xnf9DOYPhz3cl95hUUPIuL/lgPUv4pFr9s+wg m8yHH0A12TjjzxKumGV6xYviCcuhdWIRPjD6l3MMz+k6F6dsBp29sFd+PoHUeiMH oyb0u/9ih4ddtXbiZzUViLpL+F/E8CfYcocXVo/j1iVNXnP11bwFTyAcPwZKSvqa MPuCdyRdRsSNONlCvbo+XhZscGc8OSqbG6QdiNflgr0XXg8KQmgkdPApuu0dZ5YP Cre9iXj0OxNBnx92sxIuOiOVT4O35C4MnUTVjDuYTqu3zrZmL6+xYnBSyyV3ioyu 0asmh0zdtK9CirecRREOvsuF871ufDRxZn92/Akq8ajaN/czRoNRRrz0hfOjA+2K EZ964FuPVv+y0rc7o2z9vLpSuC9W2Bkh3mWRFyIvMLpj7lNd0R8VVY5cY9mkLeBP kaUGb5IkFSwXa8Gy2g11xD8ZFQcolrq3kL4pw7mJrNB21CsPXhQixS/FPdcEAC6l /UzmP8MlWGv3Sn7jEjNa =M7jj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
