From owner-freebsd-doc Wed Aug 30 10:16:55 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from bmah-freebsd-0.cisco.com (bmah-freebsd-0.cisco.com [171.70.84.42]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EDF637B423; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:16:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from bmah@localhost) by bmah-freebsd-0.cisco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) id e7UHGq093351; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:16:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bmah) Message-Id: <200008301716.e7UHGq093351@bmah-freebsd-0.cisco.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Nik Clayton Cc: Jim Mock , "Bruce A. Mah" , freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HARDWARE.TXT vs. {i386,alpha}/RELNOTES.TXT In-Reply-To: <20000830154508.A62946@canyon.nothing-going-on.org> References: <200008291834.e7TIYFm20218@bmah-freebsd-0.cisco.com> <20000829204112.A5240@luna.osd.bsdi.com> <20000830154508.A62946@canyon.nothing-going-on.org> Comments: In-reply-to Nik Clayton message dated "Wed, 30 Aug 2000 15:45:08 +0100." From: bmah@freebsd.org (Bruce A. Mah) Reply-To: bmah@freebsd.org X-Face: g~c`.{#4q0"(V*b#g[i~rXgm*w;:nMfz%_RZLma)UgGN&=j`5vXoU^@n5v4:OO)c["!w)nD/!!~e4Sj7LiT'6*wZ83454H""lb{CC%T37O!!'S$S&D}sem7I[A 2V%N&+ X-Image-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/Images/bmah-cisco-small.gif X-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_-299693996P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:16:52 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --==_Exmh_-299693996P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii If memory serves me right, Nik Clayton wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 08:41:12PM -0700, Jim Mock wrote: > > On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 at 11:34:15 -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote: > > > Could someone explain to this newbie why we maintain separate lists > > > of supported hardware in HARDWARE.TXT vs. {i386,alpha}/RELNOTES.TXT? > > > > I've never been able to figure this out either. > > Me either (certainly predates me). Feel free to nuke it. So, it seems like what we ought to do is to sync up HARDWARE.TXT with RELNOTES.TXT (to make sure there's one consistent list), and then replace the hardware lists in RELNOTES.TXT with pointers to HARDWARE.TXT. Anyone we need to ask about this? > Agreed. In my ideal world, Appendix F becomes the official supported > hardware list. HARDWARE.TXT is generated by a process that does > something like > > cp ...../handbook/hardware/chapter.sgml . > cat doctype.sgml chapter.sgml | jade -foo -bar -baz ... > chapter.html > w3m -dump chapter.html > HARDWARE.TXT That's kind of cool. Couple of random comments: There's information in Appendix F that we probably don't need in HARDWARE.TXT. I don't know enough about the handbook generation process about how to pare HARDWARE.TXT down so that it resembles the current file. It also means we need the doc distribution installed to generate a release. On the other hand, doing this means there's exactly *ONE* place for all the hardware compatability info, which is a Good Thing (TM). > I'm handwaving somewhat, but you get the idea. HARDWARE.TXT in the > repository should say: > > DO NOT TOUCH THIS FILE. IT IS GENERATED AUTOMATICALLY FROM THE > HANDBOOK, GO AND EDIT THE HANDBOOK INSTEAD! For now, what about maintaining HARDWARE.TXT as "the hardware list that goes in distributions" and changing section 2.3 of the handbook to point the users to HARDWARE.TXT for whatever distribution they care about ("please refer to HARDWARE.TXT in your distribution for more details")? If we want to make the handbook more self-contained, we can periodically sync a new section of Appendix F with contents from HARDWARE.TXT. Bruce. --==_Exmh_-299693996P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use MessageID: 7yWf4KnHioDc/j+7ng6z0vzryYIt3BZK iQA/AwUBOa1BhNjKMXFboFLDEQKVswCghQZyyYrlQeJcOykf9WAHarGZHMwAniGq Jgxl6LmzA+E1ziloioiXwkJR =HDa+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_-299693996P-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message