From owner-freebsd-doc Tue Oct 5 16:43: 1 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from scrabble.freeuk.net (scrabble.freeuk.net [212.126.144.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EC7A156A4; Tue, 5 Oct 1999 16:41:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from andrew@ukug.uk.FreeBSD.org) Received: from [212.126.148.228] (helo=cream.org) by scrabble.freeuk.net with esmtp (Exim 2.11 #1) id 11YeCf-0004CS-00; Wed, 6 Oct 1999 00:41:05 +0100 Content-Length: 1531 Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.3 [p0] on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <19991004234956.A977@marder-1> Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 00:40:53 +0100 (BST) From: Andrew Boothman To: Mark Ovens Subject: Re: Automatic Documentation Index Cc: nbm@mithrandr.moira.org, wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de, nik@freebsd.org, doc@freebsd.org, Andrew Boothman Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 04-Oct-99 Mark Ovens wrote: > Seems like a good thing to me. I've just tried it out (had to change > the paths to the FAQ and Handbook for the DocBook docs). There are > quite a few ports that install docs other than (& sometimes instead > of) manpages but don't advertise the fact. Exactly. Hence the need to index them. > As a temporary solution, until the +DOC files are added, how about > looking for html files in the +CONTENTS files? Something like > > # cd /var/db/pkg > # grep '\.html$' */+CONTENTS > > and parsing the output in some way (e.g. if there are several .html > files installed including "index.html" then just list the index > and ignore the others). It's not perfect, but it would dig out all > the "hidden" documentation. I fully understand what you're getting at here. And I can see how this would work. I'm a little worried about the possability that this could pick up on installed files that arn't actually documentation. I'm not sure if it's likely, but it would really confuse a user to be pointed to files that aren't documentation. Plus, in the +DOCS file we have a description of the file that we're linking to, we wouldn't know what the file is if we link to it this way. Plus, we don't want the ports folk to think that this negates the need to retrofit +DOCS files to as many ports as possible. What are everyone else's opinions on this? --- Andrew Boothman FreeBSD UK User Group http://ukug.uk.FreeBSD.org/~andrew/ http://ukug.uk.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message