Todd Vierling writes:
> On Wed, 23 Sep 1998, Michael C. Richardson wrote:
> 
> :   makeinfo should *not* be part of "info" or "doc" or "man"
> :   I'd really like to move towards having a completely MI /usr/share
> : distribution. Seperate the documents from the programs to view them.
> 
> It should be part of "text", the same set which contains groff (nroff) -
> it's the tool used to generate the files.
> 
> In summary, I'd like to collimate this thread and do the following:
> 
> - introduce a "doc" set to take /usr/share/doc and /usr/share/info

I might disagree. We want a "share" set, certainly...

> - add gtexinfo to the src/gnu/dist/texinfo tree
> - have texinfo build, adding install-info(1), makeinfo(1) and info(1) to
>   /usr/bin
> - add texinfo.tex to /usr/share/misc (for TeX's benefit)
> - make install-info(1) part of the `base' set
> - make makeinfo(1) part of the `text' set

Do we really need all that if we just install the "info" files
straight from the tree?

> - make info(1) part of the `doc' set (though it may qualify for `base' as
>   many pkgs install info files)

probably belongs with the info files.

> - build the info files dynamically via makeinfo(1) and .texi files

do we need to build them dynamically?

> - possibly build formatted-plaintext versions of the texi files for
>   /usr/share/doc
> - put together some sort of logic in pkgsrc to drop the gtexinfo pkg
>   dependency on systems which have texinfo in the base
> 
> What did I miss?
> 
> -- 
> -- Todd Vierling (Personal tv@pobox.com; Bus. todd_vierling@xn.xerox.com)
>