Closed ghost closed 8 years ago
Basically yes. html
is for the building the doc in html
format. pdf
is to build it in pdf
format. I recommend you to use package.use/99sage-bin-doc
to set sane useflags to get the documentation in binary format.
I don't recommend user of sage-7.1
and under to build the documentation - in either format - but to use the binary form.
The building of the documentation has made a leap in sanity in the upcoming 7.2
, bin-html
and bin-pdf
may be removed for that one. Still thinking about it.
I think it's no necessary to build doc yourself, so useflags 'html' and 'pdf' can be removed, and the description of useflag 'pdf' in equery u
output is misleading as I see
Hum... You are right, in this case the output is misleading. The description is the default description of the useflag and doesn't represent the use I make of it. I could add a more appropriate description in metadata.xml
.
Offering pre-built documentation started because building the documentation in sage-on-gentoo was broken. It is not anymore but requires a specific version of sphinx
, when a more recent version is stable. Building the documentation yourself in 7.1 and under may mean that you have to downgrade your sphinx
install.
Upcoming sage 7.2 will use sphinx
1.4 which isn't in the main tree yet but already present in this overlay.
When 7.2 comes out, getting the doc won't be a building problem anymore, just a time problem.
equery -u sage
should now report something more sensible, I also updated other entries in the last 24hours.
from the use description, I guess pdf is not meant for compiling and install documentation of pdf type. however :
the pdf useflag seems to be similar to html and is thus conflict of bin-pdf