Re: "doc" option

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>]

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 01:17:19AM +0300, Aleksej Saushev wrote:
> Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost> writes:
> 
> > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 02:07:16AM +0300, Aleksej Saushev wrote:
> >> Unless anyone objects in a week, I'll start adding "doc" option to packages
> >> I'm interested to be stripped of installed documentation. First positions
> >> in the queue are occupied by modular X.org packages. I'm not going to 
> >> change
> >> current state, default will be to install documentation.
> >
> > Please do NOT randomly strip off documentation. The *only* case where
> > such an option should be added to an X.org package is if it requires
> > additional (non-trivial) dependencies. Do not make the tree harder to
> > maintain than necessary.
> 
> Do you consider groff a trivial dependency? I don't.

Yes. More importantly, you don't need it to create the man pages.

> I don't see why anyone wants to use man pages on mobile device either,
> all of them add perceptible dead weight nevertheless.

That argument doesn't really cut either. Man pages and other forms of
documentation tend to be a lot larger than other crap like static
libraries. Seriously, if you want to build an image for a space
constrained system, take a package and prune the file list by sed/awk/...

> There's not a big problem to maintain package with few options.

Yes, it is a major PITA.

Joerg