Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1681827 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH 0/5] Make PDF builds work again

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH 0/5] Make PDF builds work again Jim Davis <jim.epost@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 23:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 0/5] Make PDF builds work again Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@darmarit.de> - 2017-07-06 10:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 0/5] Make PDF builds work again Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@s-opensource.com> - 2017-07-06 12:00 +0200

#1681827 — Re: [PATCH 0/5] Make PDF builds work again

On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jul 2017 10:25:38 +0200
> Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
>
>> Only now stumbled over the full thread, but the drm patch is already
>> queued up for at least 4.13 (Dave was out and all that). I guess we could
>> try to cherry-pick through stable.
>
> I kind of gave up on the 4.12 goal, at least for now.  The number of
> complaints has not been huge - I suspect you're far from the only one who
> is not too worried about building PDFs...:)

If fixing pdf (and ps) builds isn't worth the bother -- which I
wouldn't debate -- then it's best to just drop those build targets.
The only worrisome thing I see here is having build targets carried
from release to release that don't work.

-- 
Jim

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1682178

> Am 05.07.2017 um 23:22 schrieb Jim Davis <jim.epost@gmail.com>:
> 
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 3 Jul 2017 10:25:38 +0200
>> Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
>> 
>>> Only now stumbled over the full thread, but the drm patch is already
>>> queued up for at least 4.13 (Dave was out and all that). I guess we could
>>> try to cherry-pick through stable.
>> 
>> I kind of gave up on the 4.12 goal, at least for now.  The number of
>> complaints has not been huge - I suspect you're far from the only one who
>> is not too worried about building PDFs...:)
> 
> If fixing pdf (and ps) builds isn't worth the bother -- which I
> wouldn't debate -- then it's best to just drop those build targets.
> The only worrisome thing I see here is having build targets carried
> from release to release that don't work.

my 5cent:

we have to communicate that PDF build is in a beta stage (for a long
time).

Sphinx-doc's PDF chain was not well maintained for a long time. With
newer versions (started with 1.5 and continued in 1.6) it becomes
better and better. This gives me some hope that there comes a day
where building PDFs is robust enough to use in automatic builds.

As long as we try to support various version of Sphinx shipped by
various distros and at the same time make/need deep (LaTeX)
adjustments, we will find those discussions on the ML.

If you are doubtful about my assessment, compare Sphinx's 
TeX stuff from master 

https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/tree/master/sphinx/texinputs

with e.g. 1.4.9 tag

https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/tree/1.4.9/sphinx/texinputs

-- Markus --

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1682292

Em Wed, 5 Jul 2017 14:22:35 -0700
Jim Davis <jim.epost@gmail.com> escreveu:

> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Jul 2017 10:25:38 +0200
> > Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> >  
> >> Only now stumbled over the full thread, but the drm patch is already
> >> queued up for at least 4.13 (Dave was out and all that). I guess we could
> >> try to cherry-pick through stable.  
> >
> > I kind of gave up on the 4.12 goal, at least for now.  The number of
> > complaints has not been huge - I suspect you're far from the only one who
> > is not too worried about building PDFs...:)  
> 
> If fixing pdf (and ps) builds isn't worth the bother -- which I
> wouldn't debate -- then it's best to just drop those build targets.
> The only worrisome thing I see here is having build targets carried
> from release to release that don't work.

My $5 cents on that. We do automatic pdf builds at linuxtv.org
since when we moved the media books to Sphinx. In order to avoid
regressions, we use a virtual environment for Sphinx, and we only
update to a newer version after checking if the upgrade won't break
build. Currently, it is running Sphinx version 1.4.9.

I did a grep on the access for the media.pdf doc at the apache's
log. We don't keep a long history there.

We had 41 accesses to the pdf logs over the last ~3 days, with means
that people are finding PDF output useful.

-

From my side, I like having everything into a single file
specially when I'm needing to find things at the document. Well,
ePub sort of provides that, but it is a way worse than PDF or
html, specially when big tables are there. Btw, over the
last ~3 days, we had only 1 access to the ePub version. So, not a
very popular format.

Thanks,
Mauro

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web