From owner-freebsd-doc Tue Jan 21 11:18:48 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6BDE37B401 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:18:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.ruhr.de (in-ruhr4.ruhr.de [212.23.134.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 796E243F13 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:18:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ue@nathan.ruhr.de) Received: (qmail 19385 invoked by uid 10); 21 Jan 2003 19:18:42 -0000 Received: from nathan.internal (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nathan.internal (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0LJI20B028959 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 20:18:02 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ue@nathan.internal) Received: (from ue@localhost) by nathan.internal (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id h0LJI2DY028957 for freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 20:18:02 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 20:18:02 +0100 From: Udo Erdelhoff To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Adding a publication date to the installation instructions Message-ID: <20030121191802.GE173@nathan.ruhr.de> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20030120205441.GC173@nathan.ruhr.de> <200301211651.h0LGp9nS001708@intruder.bmah.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200301211651.h0LGp9nS001708@intruder.bmah.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Bruce, On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 08:51:09AM -0800, Bruce A. Mah wrote: > The problem with the installation instructions is that the content is > scattered throughout several files and there is not any single > $FreeBSD$ tag you (or anybody) can use to give the latest revision date > for the document as a whole. I hate it when you are right and have to ditch one of my half-cooked ideas into the trashcan. Obviously, adding a visible $FreeBSD$ tag to each file would look... strange. > I *think* you can do this for the installation guide as well, and I > wouldn't object to somebody doing this if it can be made to work. Why do I get the nasty feeling that this will be more complicated than just doing a gigantic cat * > newfile.sgml? > It can't be done for the hardware notes, because there are some MD > files. Which mean that even if I manage to add a usefull publication date to the installation instructions, I am still short of my target of having a way to automatically identify the parts of the rendered release notes that are out of date... short of building them and running diff, that is. /s/Udo -- "41.6: Ersetzen von Austauschen" (HP Color LJ 5M Fehlermeldung) "41.6: Replace Coating Kit" (das englische Original dieser Meldung) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message