Test of Docs Packaging

[Tommy Reynolds]

Uttered Karsten Wade <kwade at redhat.com>, spake thus:

> > What am I missing?
> 3) People who want to use the FDP structure to write their own
> documentation.
> 
> They don't necessarily care a whit about our content, so CVS access and
> associated is not valuable.  Having a complete document building
> environment is.

Ah! Clarity!  "I see", said the blind man.  Much grass.

The key to cleanly producing the three RPM flavors your mentioned is
to provide a unique <flavor>.spec.in for each type.  In the
"%install" section for a flavor, we can hide all the sed/awk/install-fu we 
will need.  Leave the "Makefile" and "Makefile.common" pretty much
unchanged and transform any necessary paths from the spec file.

I'll give this some thought, now that I understand the need.

Cheers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/docs/attachments/20051021/eb5d73a5/attachment-0001.bin