Am 19.08.2016 um 14:49 schrieb Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016, Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Am 19.08.2016 um 00:35 schrieb Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>: >> * the pdf goes to the "latex" folder .. since this is WIP >> and there are different solutions conceivable ... I left >> it open for the first. > > Mea culpa. As I said, I intended my patches as RFC only. I think this is OK for the first. I thought that we first let finish Mauro's task on making the media PDF and after this we decide how move from the latex folder to a pdf folder (one solution see below). >>> I'm not sure that we actually need the format-specific subfolders, but we >>> should be consistent across all the formats and in the documentation and, >>> as of this patch, we're not. >> >> IMHO a structure where only non-HTML formats are placed in subfolders >> (described above) is the better choice. >> >> In the long run I like to get rid of all the intermediate formats >> (latex, .doctrees) and build a clear output-folder (with all formats >> in) which could be copied 1:1 to a static HTTP-server. > > When I added the Documentation/output subfolder, my main intention was > to separate the source documents from everything that is generated, > intermediate or final. I suggest you keep the generated files somewhere > under output. This'll be handly also when ensuring O= works. Yes, everything is under output / tested O=.. > I set up the format specific subfolders, because I thought people would > want to keep them separated and independent. For me, all the formats > were equal and at the same level in that regard. You're suggesting to > make html the root of everything? Yes this was my intention. With some additional work, we can build a root index.html where the other formats are linked. Since other formats *below* index.html, everything is *reachable* from the root index.html. Am 19.08.2016 um 15:32 schrieb Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > Agreed. it should either use subfolders or not. > > IMHO, the best would be to just output everything at > Documentation/output, if this is possible. That "fixes" the issue > of generating PDF files at the latex dir, with sounds weird, IMHO. Changing the latex/pdf issue should be just a two-liner (not yet tested). @@ -71,8 +71,8 @@ ifeq ($(HAVE_PDFLATEX),0) $(warning The 'xelatex' command was not found. Make sure you have it installed and in PATH to produce PDF output.) @echo " SKIP Sphinx $@ target." else # HAVE_PDFLATEX - @$(call loop_cmd,sphinx,latex,.,latex,.) - $(Q)$(MAKE) PDFLATEX=xelatex LATEXOPTS="-interaction=nonstopmode" -C $(BUILDDIR)/latex + @$(call loop_cmd,sphinx,latex,.,pdf,.) + $(Q)$(MAKE) PDFLATEX=xelatex LATEXOPTS="-interaction=nonstopmode" -C $(BUILDDIR)/pdf endif # HAVE_PDFLATEX > I guess I mention on a previous e-mail, but SPHINXDIRS= is not working > for PDF files generation. Not yet, there is a concurrency question to answer, should sub-folder's PDFs defined in the main conf.py-file or in the sub-folder conf.py? I suggest the last one, or in other words: the PDF content of a target should have the same content as the HTML target even if it is a subfolder or the whole documentation. But this is only possible if we know, that all media content can be integrated in the big PDF file. After said this, what is your suggestion? For me its all equal, these are only my 2cent to this discussion :-) -- Markus -- > > Thanks, > Mauro -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
