On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 11:32:01AM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
> Really? See, I'd automatically use mc, which also handles compression just
> fine but doesn't require Apache (and isn't as slow and bloated as Firefox).
That's also an option, but not all HTML files look great in "lynx -dump"
output. An
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 03:54:46PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 08:56:41PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > The underlying question here was really, "Should PDF documentation be
> > installed compressed?" (Or PostScript or OpenOffice etc. in place of
> > PDF.) The p
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 08:56:41PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> The underlying question here was really, "Should PDF documentation be
> installed compressed?" (Or PostScript or OpenOffice etc. in place of
> PDF.) The policy is not worded precisely enough on that subject.
> Obviously, you
The underlying question here was really, "Should PDF documentation be
installed compressed?" (Or PostScript or OpenOffice etc. in place of
PDF.) The policy is not worded precisely enough on that subject.
Obviously, you don't want to install HTML compressed. So I take it
that "text documenta
On 17 May 2006, Peter Eisentraut told this:
> I would like to see some clarifications for section 12.3 "Additional
> documentation", in particular this:
>
> Any additional documentation that comes with the package may be
> installed at the discretion of the package maintainer. Text
> documentation
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.7.2.0
Severity: wishlist
I would like to see some clarifications for section 12.3 "Additional
documentation", in particular this:
Any additional documentation that comes with the package may be installed
at the discretion of the package maintainer. Text docum
6 matches
Mail list logo
