From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752822AbcHOJk0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Aug 2016 05:40:26 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:64577 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752131AbcHOJkY (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Aug 2016 05:40:24 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,524,1464678000"; d="scan'208";a="1041295465" From: Jani Nikula To: Jonathan Corbet Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Daniel Vetter , Markus Heiser Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Documentation: switch to pdflatex and fix pdf build In-Reply-To: <20160812164046.1e90d549@lwn.net> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo References: <20160810120535.27570309@vela.lan> <20160812164046.1e90d549@lwn.net> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.22.1+63~g648dcc7 (https://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.4.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 12:40:21 +0300 Message-ID: <87lgzyv08q.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 13 Aug 2016, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 18:54:06 +0300 > Jani Nikula wrote: > >> With these you should be able to get started with pdf generation. It's a >> quick transition to pdflatex, the patches are not very pretty, but the >> pdf output is. Patch 3/3 works as an example where to add your stuff >> (latex_documents in conf.py) and how. > > OK, now I have a bone to pick with you. > > I applied this, then decided to install the needed toolchain on the > Tumbleweed system I've been playing with; it wanted to install 1,727 > packages to get pdflatex. Pandoc just doesn't seem so bad anymore. Jon, I sent these to unblock Luis, and as a starting point for a discussion about rst2pdf vs. pdflatex. I didn't mean I'd want these merged as-is! I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I don't mind at all if you want to drop them. As I played around, it worked for *me* better than rst2pdf. I had pdflatex already installed, so I didn't pay attention to the deps, and the numbers you quote come as a suprise. > I've applied this so we have something to play with, but it doesn't feel > like a great solution. This is the sort of installation hell that we > wanted to get away from. It makes me wonder how hard it can really be to > fix rst2pdf; I wish I could say I'll find some time to figure that out. > Sigh. I'm afraid pdf generation is not very high on my list of priorities right now. Surely I'll get back to this eventually, but not any time soon. :( BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center