From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jochem Huhmann To: docbook-tools-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 06:36:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <951281049.19725.ezmlm@sourceware.cygnus.com> <20000223085415.B611@ciberia.es> <38B3ABD6.71623993@cybercable.tm.fr> <38B40C05.FD198BAE@cybercable.tm.fr> X-SW-Source: 2000/msg00083.html * Eric Bischoff wrote: > Caldera is a RPM-based distribution, so my packaging will probably be > only profitable for those with RPM-based distributions, like the current > DocBook tools that only offer a mirror of the source packages for those > without RPM. Furthermore, I have been told the Debian project already > did a very clean packaging of its own (seeking a greater compatibility > with them could also be a concern, BTW). OK. What I meant is: There is some software like jade and the stylesheets. There are a lot of wrappers around these - Marks tools, the scripts from SuSE, the KDE-stuff and SGMLTools (for the most part a wrapper written in python). The software should be packaged like any other software, I don't see the point in putting it together with scripts and such. This creates conflicts with other packages. Try to install the SGMLTools (which come with the stylesheets and jade) together with other packages, that also install the stylesheets. This is a mess and every single Linux-Distribution comes up with it's own mess. This is not part of a solution but a part of the problem. > Currently, the docbook-stylesheets package from the docbook-tools > includes three things : > 1 - Norman Walsh's modular stylesheets > 2 - the db2* and install-catalog scripts > 3 - some "glue" files like "cygnus-common.dsl" > > I think that (1) has to be packaged separately for modularity reasons, I > suggest to rename (2) the "docbook-utils" (only a component of the > docbook-tools), and to get rid of (3) because this kind of files imply a > lot of assumptions on the way you are working. There should be some "standard" for directory layout, location of the catalog etc. Wrappers should build upon this common standard. So you could use whichever you want. Actually I believe this is an issue for the LSB or FHS-Projects. Caldera is also member of LSB and is responsible for the reference implementation, or am I wrong? Maybe you should ask Ralf Flaxa who is assigned as technical lead for this task. Or ask on one of the LSB-lists. Jochem -- Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!