Re: Should I split off arch independant part?
It has been suggested that I split off the build process so that the archetecture dependant parts of the program can be built without building the documentation each time. If I were you, I'd just convert the .doc to a .pdf. Likewise, your programmer can do that in seconds with a pluginhttp://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=7(and file save as.. or export?) or a programhttp://www.softpedia.com/get/Office-tools/PDF/Simpo-PDF-Creator-Lite.shtml(and go fileprint) for ms office. You can locally place it in debian/ folder and call it in debian/mypackage.install: *debian/myfile.pdf usr/share/doc/mypackage *I also think it's possible to convert a .doc file to an .html presentation. Either way, you won't have to build anything and you'll save tons of time and unnecessary build-dependencies. I feel that computer time is much cheaper that human time. Generally true, but in a world where everything including hardware is paid and you have thousands of packages waiting to be built/rebuilt/processed/checked/acknowledged (not at the same time, but anyway), you just have to save the buildd server(s) some time. Plus, you go green. :) On the other hand, (personal opinion here) it is pointless nowadays to separate an arch-independent package if it's less than say.. 3 mb. I also think lintian complains if an arch-dependent binary package has a big /usr/share folder.
Re: Should I split off arch independant part?
On Thursday, February 09, 2012 04:37:55 PM Savvas Radevic wrote: If I were you, I'd just convert the .doc to a .pdf. Likewise, your programmer can do that in seconds with a pluginhttp://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=7(and file save as.. or export?) or a programhttp://www.softpedia.com/get/Office-tools/PDF/Simpo-PDF-Creator-Lit e.shtml(and go fileprint) for ms office. Unfortunately the .doc file is the source, so everything must be rebuilt from source i.e. the .doc file as part of the build process. The next version of the documentation will probably be another .doc file. The .doc is the source because the person writing the documentation prefers to write in .doc format. It would be disingenuous to say that anything other than the .doc is the source. If I were writing the documentation from now on, I would convert once to docbook, or some other civilized format and then say that the .docbook file was the source. But I am not writing the documentation, so I can't do that. -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Should I split off arch independant part?
On Thu, Feb 09, 2012 at 05:21:55PM -0600, Paul Elliott wrote: Unfortunately the .doc file is the source, so everything must be rebuilt from source i.e. the .doc file as part of the build process. What kind of documentation are we talking about? If it’s just a reference manual of some sort, chances are catdoc(1) will do a reasonable job at converting it to plain text. -- Andrea Bolognani e...@kiyuko.org Resistance is futile, you will be garbage collected. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Should I split off arch independant part?
On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:00:55 -0600, Paul Elliott wrote: The untimate source of my project is a windows programer who GPLed. He thought it would be a good idea to write the documentation in windows word .doc file! Bad move. The only free program that I can find to convert this document source to a civilized format is unoconv together with libreoffice-writer. In the opensuse world loconvert also works. But it also uses libreoffice-writer. Is antiword not working for this file? (Might be a problem of the MS Word version.) Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Aimee Mann: Say Anything signature.asc Description: Digital signature
