Am Donnerstag, den 20.04.2006, 10:03 +0900 schrieb Charles Plessy: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 01:21:33AM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote : > > > > I would further not use: > > > > <address>&dhemail;</address> > > <author> > > &dhfirstname; > > &dhsurname; > > </author> > > Hi, > > Thanks a lot, it solved my problem. I was using the template from > dh_make. Shall I file a bug ?
No. The upcoming 1.70.0 release improves manpage stylesheets a lot and then the dh_make _could_ be changed. But as long as we use the buggy and outdated 1.68.1 stylesheets, it doesn't make sense. And there is already a wishlist report to update the docbook-xsl package. > > Instead use the sample you can find e.g. in the manpage sources at > > http://cvs.wgdd.de/cgi-bin/cvsweb/fglrx_man/. Any extra AUTHORS section > > in the XML source is not necessary. Also edition, date and productname > > (or refmiscinfo calss=software|version|source) are supported with the > > upcoming stylesheets. > > > > I suggest: Do not build the manpage during build-time. Build it earlier > > so you can drop any dependency to the outdated docbook-xsl package. The > > next problem is, the the catalog rewrites the 'current'-HTTP-source to > > the outdated Debian package. > > Actually, in the long term, I would like the bioinformatic packages I am > creating to be part of collectively maintained project, so I am hesitant > to build the manpages in a separate process. Have a look at the libxml2 or libxslt project. They write the manpage with XML. The manpage itself is created by the Makefile but shipped with the source. A similar way can be done in the debian/ directory. Add the source there, but run xsltproc to create the manpage. This is IMHO not a problem in a collectively maintained project. Just my opinion. Regards, Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
