[RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions?

[RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions?

[Jarek Poplawski]

Is it really so superfluous to have a possibility of 
reading all docs from Documentation on a lean box
(e.g. server) without all those xml, flex etc.
printers' toys installed?

Jarek P. 

Re: [RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions?

[Randy Dunlap]

On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:42:40 +0200 Jarek Poplawski wrote:

> Is it really so superfluous to have a possibility of 
> reading all docs from Documentation on a lean box
> (e.g. server) without all those xml, flex etc.
> printers' toys installed?

make help ==>

Documentation targets:
  Linux kernel internal documentation in different formats:
  xmldocs (XML DocBook), psdocs (Postscript), pdfdocs (PDF)
  htmldocs (HTML), mandocs (man pages, use installmandocs to install)
                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

and 'man 9 yield'
works for me.

or are you saying that you want large *.txt book-like generated files
instead of larger *.html etc?

---
~Randy

Re: [RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions?

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:41:05AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:42:40 +0200 Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> 
> > Is it really so superfluous to have a possibility of 
> > reading all docs from Documentation on a lean box
> > (e.g. server) without all those xml, flex etc.
> > printers' toys installed?
> 
> make help ==>
> 
> Documentation targets:
>   Linux kernel internal documentation in different formats:
>   xmldocs (XML DocBook), psdocs (Postscript), pdfdocs (PDF)
>   htmldocs (HTML), mandocs (man pages, use installmandocs to install)
>                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> and 'man 9 yield'
> works for me.
> 
> or are you saying that you want large *.txt book-like generated files
> instead of larger *.html etc?

I'm saying that I coudn't do it even on knoppix dvd version
(a year ago) and there are gazillions of desktop software
which I don't use.

I only need to read this in any readable form like
the rest of Documentation.

Regards,
Jarek P.

-------------
Slackware_lean_box$ make mandocs

*** You need to install xmlto ***
make[1]: *** [Documentation/DocBook/wanbook.9] Error 1
make: *** [mandocs] Error 2

-------------
http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/fedora/4/i386/xmlto-0.0.18-6.i386.html
Provides

    * xmlto 

Requires

    * /bin/bash
    * docbook-dtds
    * docbook-xsl
    * libc.so.6
    * libxslt >= 0.9.0
    * passivetex 

http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/fedora/4/i386/passivetex-1.25-5.noarch.html
Provides

    * passivetex 

Requires

    * /bin/sh
    * /bin/sh
    * /bin/sh
    * tetex >= 3.0
    * xmltex >= 20000118-4 

http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/fedora/4/i386/libxslt-1.1.14-2.i386.html
Provides

    * libxslt
    * libexslt.so.0
    * libxslt.so.1 

Requires

    * /bin/sh
    * /bin/sh
    * libc.so.6
    * libexslt.so.0
    * libgcrypt.so.11
    * libgpg-error.so.0
    * libm.so.6
    * libpthread.so.0
    * libxml2 >= 2.3.8
    * libxml2.so.2
    * libxslt.so.1
    * libz.so.1 

http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/fedora/4/i386/docbook-dtds-1.0-26.noarch.html
Provides

    * docbook-dtds
    * docbook-dtd-sgml
    * docbook-dtd-xml
    * docbook-dtd30-sgml
    * docbook-dtd31-sgml
    * docbook-dtd40-sgml
    * docbook-dtd41-sgml
    * docbook-dtd412-xml
    * docbook-dtd42-sgml
    * docbook-dtd42-xml
    * docbook-dtd43-sgml
    * docbook-dtd43-xml
    * docbook-dtd44-sgml
    * docbook-dtd44-xml 

Requires

    * /bin/sh
    * /bin/sh
    * fileutils
    * grep
    * libxml2 >= 2.3.8
    * openjade = 1.3.2
    * perl >= 0:5.002
    * sgml-common >= 0.6.3-4
    * textutils
    * xml-common
    * xml-common 

etc, etc, etc...

Re: [RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions?

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 09:29:45PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> Doesnt slackware supply a prebuilt package of the kernel docs in various 
> formats for just this purpose? From what I can recall, redhat and 
> ubuntu both do this.
 
Maybe does. But do you believe there is anybody reading
this list who uses only distro's prebuilt kernel versions?

Jarek P.

Re: [RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions?

[Glenn Enright]

On Thursday 19 October 2006 21:58, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 09:29:45PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> > Doesnt slackware supply a prebuilt package of the kernel docs in
> > various formats for just this purpose? From what I can recall,
> > redhat and ubuntu both do this.
>
> Maybe does. But do you believe there is anybody reading
> this list who uses only distro's prebuilt kernel versions?
>
> Jarek P.

You implied that you were trying to build on a limited resource machine, 
and I offered this as an alternative. If you really needed the *very 
latest* docs then it would probably be a newish testing platform and 
not your main machine, so you could get them of that instead? Anyway 
just my 2c.

Re: [RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions?

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 10:14:23PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> On Thursday 19 October 2006 21:58, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 09:29:45PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> > > Doesnt slackware supply a prebuilt package of the kernel docs in
> > > various formats for just this purpose? From what I can recall,
> > > redhat and ubuntu both do this.
> >
> > Maybe does. But do you believe there is anybody reading
> > this list who uses only distro's prebuilt kernel versions?
> >
> > Jarek P.
> 
> You implied that you were trying to build on a limited resource machine, 
> and I offered this as an alternative. If you really needed the *very 
> latest* docs then it would probably be a newish testing platform and 
> not your main machine, so you could get them of that instead? Anyway 
> just my 2c.
 
I'm sorry if I implied... It is not a problem of limited resources.
If I can choose I allways tend to install only necessary software.

Thanks for your 2c (they are rarity here!), 

Jarek P.

Re: [RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions?

[Glenn Enright]

On Thursday 19 October 2006 23:09, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> I'm sorry if I implied... It is not a problem of limited resources.
> If I can choose I allways tend to install only necessary software.
I suppose that certainly helps when chasing bugs. Did you have an 
alternative way of building the docs in mind that could be lighter? I 
admit the tree you described does seem a large pull just so you can 
read some text for one source package... even if it is the kernel.

> Thanks for your 2c (they are rarity here!),
You're welcome 

-- 
Please don't CC messages to me from mailing lists.

Re: [RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions?

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 11:29:07PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> On Thursday 19 October 2006 23:09, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > I'm sorry if I implied... It is not a problem of limited resources.
> > If I can choose I allways tend to install only necessary software.
> I suppose that certainly helps when chasing bugs.

There are also security reasons.

> Did you have an 
> alternative way of building the docs in mind that could be lighter? I 
> admit the tree you described does seem a large pull just so you can 
> read some text for one source package... even if it is the kernel.

Yes. My preferred alternative way is used by 
all the rest of Documentation already.

My other preferred alternative way, used by
many programs like apache, postgresql, mysql,
samba etc. is html, which could be read even 
on consoles with lynx or links. 

If there is a problem of space let it be
accessible in ftp subdirectory at least.

Cheers,
Jarek P.

Re: [RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions? [KORG]

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 01:16:20PM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
...
> My other preferred alternative way, used by
> many programs like apache, postgresql, mysql,
> samba etc. is html, which could be read even 
> on consoles with lynx or links. 
> 
> If there is a problem of space let it be
> accessible in ftp subdirectory at least.

By the way, I wonder why current versions of
Documentation/DocBook in html are not accessible
from www.kernel.org? 

Jarek P.

Re: [RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions? [KORG]

[Glenn Enright]

On Friday 20 October 2006 18:30, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> By the way, I wonder why current versions of
> Documentation/DocBook in html are not accessible
> from www.kernel.org?

Indeed many other project do this don't they, although from what Ive 
seen kernel docs tend to be a bit... untidy?/difficult to navigate?... 
for this sort of thing.

Re: [RFC] DocBook with .txt or .html versions? [KORG]

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 06:45:17PM +1300, Glenn Enright wrote:
> On Friday 20 October 2006 18:30, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > By the way, I wonder why current versions of
> > Documentation/DocBook in html are not accessible
> > from www.kernel.org?
> 
> Indeed many other project do this don't they, although from what Ive 
> seen kernel docs tend to be a bit... untidy?/difficult to navigate?... 
> for this sort of thing.
 
I hope if they were easy accessible more people would
read them and send fixes or supplements.

Jarek P.