On Fri, 2 Jul 2010, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
>>> Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of jue jul 01 21:52:00 -0400 2010:
>>>> Is there something that makes installing dia more challenging than the
>>>> other documentation build tools?
>>
>>> Err, I dunno -- it's just an apt-get away for me, but what will Tom say
>>> when it doesn't work on his ancient HP-UX 10.20 system?
>>
>> I don't try to build the docs on that box anyway --- it does have
>> openjade but such an old version that they don't build. In practice
>> building the docs already takes much more modern infrastructure than
>> compiling the source code; and besides there are many fewer people
>> who care about doing it.
>>
>> A more interesting question is whether Marc can install a working
>> version of dia on whatever he uses to wrap the tarballs.
>
> One more issue is that the dia and png files are going to impact our
> download sizes:
>
> 526k ./dia
> 483k ./png
>
> If we generate the png from the dia files, we are looking at increasing
> the source download by 526k and the binary downloads by 483k for all
> existing images and, of course, as we add images, these sizes will
> increase.
Which brings me to a point I brought up before ... do we want to start
looking at a dist file split similar to what Devrim does for packages?
lib vs client vs server vs docs vs ... ? where each could be invididually
built, or requires a prev set (ie. client would require lib first) sort of
thing ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A.
scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org
Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org
