El Sábado, 25 de Junio de 2005 02:23, Jeremy Huntwork escribió: > Btw, sorry if this sounded harsh. I just went in to edit some stuff, > found a plethora of includes and couldn't make heads or tails of them > for a bit. It was rather frustrating. It felt at first as if they were > doing the very opposite of what they were meant to, ie, make the lives > of the editors eaiser.
Not harsh at all, the cross-tools dir is a big beast and the Xinclude stuff on that chapter isn't yet as good than they could be. At this momment I have the same feeling that you about Xinclude when working on cross-tools files ;-) Like you said , the files should be more arch-autocontained. That is a know issue and my next steep after depuring the text and the list of commands explanations. Working on it now. Like I said to Jim some days ago: ---- 05-06-05 11:29 -- As a note, I'm, not yet very comfortable with the Xinclude stuff. In part due a bug in libxml2: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=306081 Appart from that, the big issue is when will be needed to add or remove some para or screen block on the master files. That will involve to have to fix the xpointer paths in all the children files, and there is a lot of children files for Glibc and GCC. But using the Xinclude approach will do more most easy to fix typos or global redaction changes, plus allow us to see the actual differences between the same file on different archs, and reduce the sources size. Well, with the time we will see if that work. At least, to drop the Xinclude tags, if needed, is more easy than to add them. ------------------------ -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.com TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-book FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
