Hi, James Addison <j...@jp-hosting.net> wrote (Fri, 19 May 2023 23:28:55 +0100): > > Please note the &oldreleasename; in the URL! > > I could not get this working with sphinx (if someone knows better, please > > contact me!) > > Could the 'extlinks' feature[1] of Sphinx be helpful to migrate those?
Yes, thanks for the pointer! I used that now to get the manpage links fixed! > (it allows defining URL pattern aliases, so for example :oldreleasenotes: > could > map to https://www.debian.org/releases/bullseye/releasenotes and > :releasenotes: > could map to https://www.debian.org/releases/bookworm/releasenotes for D12) > > Parameters are supported too, and that could be useful for package-or-filepath > refs (re: grep -r '`.*<' source |grep -o '<https.*>' | sort | uniq -c |sort > -n) The drawback is, it is not as flexible as the entities in docbook. For example, there is the following URL in this manual in docbook: &url-debian-mirror-eg;/debian/dists/&releasename;/main/binary-&architecture;/... You see, there are three entites in this URL! This seems to be not supported by extlinks :-(( > > Beside this, I need help to adapt the buildchain, to get the possibility of > > building the release-notes for the different architectures. > > I have no python knowledge, so I will most likely not get this running > > myself. > > I'll try to take a look into that soon to see what I can find out. Do you > know how the current docbook-based build varies by architecture? There are some chapters, which are only visible for specific architectures, like in installing.dbk: <section id="cloud" arch="amd64;arm64;ppc64el" condition="fixme"> <title>Cloud installations</title> <para> The <ulink url="&url-cloud-team;">cloud team</ulink> publishes Debian &releasename; for several popular cloud computing services including: > Perhaps we can borrow some build scripting from developers-reference and/or > debian-policy.. but I suppose those don't have per-architecture output. I think so, yes. That will be of no help, I fear... > > And the last point is the integration into the debhelper tools: I don't know > > if it is required, to have the release-notes fit for building as a whole > > package with sbuild or debuild or similar. Salsa tries to build it via CI > > at every push, but currently fails. > > It's possible I've misunderstood, but would be the goals here to be to get > the release-notes documentation built by CI, and also for it to be distributed > as a Debian package itself? > > (someone who knows more may correct me, but I think it would be great to have > the package available for install using apt in addition to the website) That was my first thought as well, yes. Holger -- Holger Wansing <hwans...@mailbox.org> PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508 3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076
