From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1FFcPM-0000PJ-3g for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 04 Mar 2006 19:27:16 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k24JQUNl027413; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 19:26:30 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k24JOZfj022328 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 19:24:36 GMT Received: from [209.249.182.18] (helo=ferris.dsl.patriot.net) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.54) id 1FFcMl-0001U7-F1 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 04 Mar 2006 19:24:35 +0000 Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 19:24:27 +0000 (UTC) From: Ferris McCormick <fmccor@gentoo.org> X-X-Sender: fmccor@terciopelo.krait.us To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Gratuitous useflaggery (doc and examples) In-Reply-To: <200603041804.k24I492G011625@gw.open-hosting.net> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0603041920170.21709@terciopelo.krait.us> References: <20060304010439.30478098@snowdrop.home> <b38c6f4c0603040715r2455faedy36e4dca4c06fb8c2@mail.gmail.com> <200603041556.k24FuZdV010675@gw.open-hosting.net> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0603041654550.21221@terciopelo.krait.us> <200603041804.k24I492G011625@gw.open-hosting.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Archives-Salt: f0ef5ce8-0e55-4186-a775-681972bfc17b X-Archives-Hash: 18e8e90c360e50f35b1850760b881413 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 4 Mar 2006, MIkey wrote: > Ferris McCormick wrote: > >>> I >>> would also like to have them excluded from binary packages. >>> >> >> That can't be right can it? You mean, like openoffice-bin, or like the >> ones you build yourself? I know that I often build on one system, install >> on several, and when I do that, I really want them to be identical. I >> think if you have your no-docs-of-any-kind option, you get your wish as to >> locally built packages, but if you really mean things like openoffice-bin, >> I doubt that any openoffice user would want it with absolutely no >> documentation. > > Yes, if I say -doc or specify FEATURES="nodoc", I don't want the docs in > there, binary package or not. I want the behavior and results to be > consistent. I am not talking about things like the internal openoffice > help documentation, I am talking about anything that goes > into /usr/share/doc, man pages, and info pages. > I misinterpreted what you wrote. I thought you meant "physically included in the package," not "installed from a binary package." I just completely read what looks like a reasonable request and turned it into nonsense without thinking about it, I guess. Regards, Ferris - -- Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@gentoo.org> Developer, Gentoo Linux (Devrel, Sparc) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFECeluQa6M3+I///cRArbCAKChFkOo8JVxW8eFbjh5++Jk387omQCcDZRR sofHhKeCBKhJuG3d60ZtyLo= =XCXt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list