Hello, Isn't there already (or planned) "nodoc" and "noman" (and, maybe, "noinfo") options, which can be set in FEATURES?
On Saturday 12 July 2003 17:53, Mamoru KOMACHI wrote: > Hi, > > At 12 Jul 2003 09:42:39 +0100, > > Alastair Tse wrote: > > Also, it seems to me that the "doc" USE flag is too encompassing. It is > > used for both installing user documentation (user guides, application > > user help) and also to install developer documentation (APIs, > > programming tutorials, Javadoc, etc). I think we should have a "devdoc" > > USE flag to differentiate between the two. > > I agree. It would be better to turn on/off doc installation with "doc" > USE flag (even though it is a user documentation, some may not want to > install any documentation at all). > > Also I suggest that we would better have "man" USE flag to decide > whether we will install man pages or not (defaults to turn on). > > However, this "man" USE flag raises one question -- how should we deal > with i18n man pages? I've almost translated portage man into Japanese, > but don't know where to ask. I think there are three options: > > 1. put it into app-i18n/manpages-ja, together with other Japanese > man pages > 2. create app-i18n/gentoo-manpages-ja and put portage (and possibly > gentoolkit) man pages into it > 3. put it into sys-apps/portage and create <lang> USE flag to > determine which man pages to install > > The problem in the first option is that if we install manpages-<lang>, > we have to install all the man pages in it regardless of what > applications we use (eg. we have to install NIS/NFS man pages even when > we don't install them). Currently German, Spanish, French and Russian > have their own man pages in app-i18n, but none of them has portage > man pages translated. > > And if we take the second option (originally nakano suggested me this > option) we will have both manpages-ja and gentoo-manpages-ja, which, > in my point of view, does not look nice. However, if we separate > gentoo-manpages-<lang> from manpages-<lang>, we can keep > gentoo-manpages-<lang> up to date pretty easily. > > Lastly, if we are to have <lang> USE flag and "man" USE flag, we > should modify /usr/lib/portage/bin/*man to handle i18nised man pages. > If we have USE="ja man", Japanese man pages will be installed in > addition to standard man pages. I think this is the most "gentooish" way > of dealing with i18n, but the problem is we need to split > manpages-<lang> into individual ebuilds. Of course it takes a lot of > time and efforts, and it will get complicated to manage i18n man pages > (though we needn't care about it in each ebuild, as it is hidden in > portage helper scripts shown above). Suppose there is an update of > translated man pages but no change in original source, should we change > the revision number so that people who turn the USE flag on can get > the benefit of it (the most non-<lang> speaker will not get any > advantage from it but be forced to recompile it) ? > > Any comments? > > regards, -- Best rgrds, .coder My Intellect is The Power! (c) The Prodigy
pgpwJz4z0dhrq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
