Todd Zullinger [off-list ref] writes:
I tested with this in Documentation/manpage-base.xsl on a CentOS 5 box
and it builds fine, leaving no cruft in the man pages regarding the
man.base.url...
<!-- set a base URL for relative links -->
<xsl:param name="man.base.url.for.relative.links"
>/path/to/git/docs</xsl:param>
Of course, the relative links looked just like they did in older
docbook releases:
1. Everyday Git
everyday.html
Is it worth the effort to have @@MAN_BASE_URL@@ in
Documentation/manpage-base.xsl or similar and replace it at build
time?
I think it depends on the likelihood that a distro has xmlto so old that
it does not understand --stringparam yet it uses stylesheet so new that
setting the parameter makes a positive difference (either it gives the
full URL or at least squelches the "You should define the parameter"
noise) in the output.
I am guessing that the answer would be that is a very unlikely combination
and not worth worrying about it, but I've been wrong before in this exact
area ;-)
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Todd Zullinger [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
I tested with this in Documentation/manpage-base.xsl on a CentOS 5 box
and it builds fine, leaving no cruft in the man pages regarding the
man.base.url...
<!-- set a base URL for relative links -->
<xsl:param name="man.base.url.for.relative.links"
>/path/to/git/docs</xsl:param>
Of course, the relative links looked just like they did in older
docbook releases:
1. Everyday Git
everyday.html
Is it worth the effort to have @@MAN_BASE_URL@@ in
Documentation/manpage-base.xsl or similar and replace it at build
time?
I think it depends on the likelihood that a distro has xmlto so old that
it does not understand --stringparam yet it uses stylesheet so new that
setting the parameter makes a positive difference (either it gives the
full URL or at least squelches the "You should define the parameter"
noise) in the output.
I am guessing that the answer would be that is a very unlikely combination
and not worth worrying about it, but I've been wrong before in this exact
area ;-)
Hello,
We have RH with xmlto 0.0.18. I was getting ready to update our
installation to 1.6.5.4, but as i understand the documentation will
not be fully available untill this issue is resolved. Could you,
please, advise if this is going to be in next 1.6.5.5?
Thanks,
Eugene