> Nikita V. Youshchenko writes: > > Hello. > > > > I've updated gcc-4.1 documentation packages (Section: non-free/doc). > > Packages are no longer debian-native, also several issues have been > > fixed. > > > > Also, I've created gcc-doc-defaults package (Section: contrib/doc) > > that builds gcc-doc, cpp-doc, gfortran-doc and treelang-doc packages > > with proper dependences and symlinks. > > > > Maintainer of all those packages is set to debian-gcc@lists.debian.org > > > > As for over version of gcc - packages for those that are currently in > > sid still contain gfdl documentation. So creation of proper non-free > > packages has to be postponed until this documentation is not removed > > from there. > > > > Currently packages are at > > http://zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su/~nikita/debian/gcc-doc/ > > > > I'm going to upload there (to non-free and contrib) in a day or two. > > Comments welcome. > > some problems: > > - the man pages (all except gfortran.1) are not built from > source. -> RC
Most manpages are available as is in upstream tarball - so I decided to use those unmodified. Fortran manpage was not there - so I had to build it. If that's a problem, all may be made built from texi source, that should be simple. > - the gfdl is not included in the man pages, nor the gfdl(7) man > pages are shipped, violating the GFDL (dropping invariant > sections). -> RC What is the best approach to handle this? Include full gfdl text in debian/copyright? Depend on a package that will provide gfdl.7 (or maybe /usr/share/common-licenses/GFDL)? > - the java man pages are not built > > - the libstdc++ docs are not built I've checked which files are in package set build from gcc-4.1 4.1.1-10, but are not in files built from gcc-4.1 4.1.1ds1-13 source. Probably java stuff is built from different source - so additional source package is needed for it's docs? As for libstdc++, looks like you do still provide all docs in libstdc++6-doc 4.1.1ds1-13 package? > - the man pages are not up to date. you have to apply the patches > from our sources. This could be done I guess. > for an alternative approach (somebody did volunteer to do that, but I > never heard again from this developer): > > - put the doc files from > http://people.debian.org/~doko/gcc-4.1/gcc-4.1.1-doc.tar.bz2 > in a source tarball. > > - build-depend on gcc-4.1-source (including the -doc patches), > build the package (bootstrap_target=all), then just package > the documentation. I don't know if this approach is better or not. Won't it take much longer to build/test/...? I did the doc package in the form I did it because: - there is currently no gcc docs in debian, which I consider a fatal problem (in my personal rating, it's much more RC than most of "official" RC bugs) - enough time has passed since gcc docs have been removed, and there is no visible activity to provide it - etch release is near, so etch release without gcc docs starts to look very probable. For me, that will mean that I will have to stop recommend Debian for people with whom I work - and then maybe to switch from Debian myself, because it is too difficult to support non-very-technical perople on distribution other than you use. I don't like this scenario at all. So I did the minimal packaging, and will try to fix at least the required minimum of issues so etch will include those (in non-free and contrib sections). Btw, thanks for reports. If anybody else wishes to create or maintain or co-maintain gcc docs packages, using mine or your or any other approach, I have nothing against. Just the opposite. I have bad and hopeless problems with free time. All free software - related plans and ideas, even simple ones, are frozen already for months. I'm doing gcc-doc packages only because I don't see anybody else working on this problem, which I consider critical. Nikita -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
