Re: [PATCH 0/5] Make PDF builds work again
From: Frank Rowand
Date: Wed Jul 05 2017 - 16:03:38 EST
On 07/03/17 01:25, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 05:46:25PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> I've just spent rather more time than I would like figuring out why the PDF
>> builds fail and what was needed to fix it. The result is the following
>> patch series. It's a combination of little mistakes and fragility in the
>> whole PDF build tool chain.
>> Mauro, Daniel: Do you want the last two? Or otherwise give me acks? I'd
>> like to send the set Linusward forthwith so that 4.12 can come out with
>> a working PDF build.
> 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.
> Personally I don't care at all for PDF builds, the only thing we do in our
> autobuilder is html, same for me locally when building docs. That tends to
> keep working :-)
> Also, 0-day only tests the htmlbuild. Maybe you want to ping Fu and ask
> him to add the pdfdocs to his build targets?
>> In general, I'm dismayed by the fragility of the whole thing. I'm also a
>> little concerned that nobody except Jim complained about the problem.
>> Perhaps nobody really cares about PDF output anymore? In the absence of a
>> concerted effort on somebody's part, I predict that PDF building will be
>> broken much of the time. I have to wonder if it's worth it...
I much prefer PDF output to html for my normal use. Not to get into a
debate about whether html or PDF is better, both have valuable use cases.
And it isn't PDF per se that I prefer - it could be any reasonable format
that contains the entire content in a single file, is easily scannable
("scrolled through", viewed by the human eye), easily searched, and can
be cut and pasted from.
As far as lack of complaints, I have been ignoring building documentation
until it feels to me like the issues from converting to the new system
have been worked out. And once that point is reached, then I need to
make time in my schedule to fix the in-source documentation so that
building the documents for device tree provides useful information
instead of incorrect information. If I was actively building
documentation I would have complained.
>> Jonathan Corbet (5):
>> Docs: Include the Latex "ifthen" package
>> Docs: Remove redundant geometry package inclusion
>> Docs: fix table problems in ras.rst
>> Docs: Use kernel-figure in vidioc-g-selection.rst
>> DRM: Fix an incorrectly formatted table
>> Documentation/admin-guide/ras.rst | 10 ++--
>> Documentation/conf.py | 3 +-
>> .../media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-g-selection.rst | 4 +-
>> include/drm/bridge/dw_hdmi.h | 70 +++++++++++-----------
>> 4 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)