5 messages in org.freebsd.freebsd-docRe: Adding a publication date to the ...| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Udo Erdelhoff | Jan 20, 2003 12:54 pm | |
| Bruce A. Mah | Jan 21, 2003 8:50 am | |
| Udo Erdelhoff | Jan 21, 2003 11:17 am | |
| Bruce A. Mah | Jan 22, 2003 6:32 am | |
| Udo Erdelhoff | Jan 22, 2003 9:26 am |
| Subject: | Re: Adding a publication date to the installation instructions | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Udo Erdelhoff (ue...@nathan.ruhr.de) | |
| Date: | Jan 21, 2003 11:17:40 am | |
| List: | org.freebsd.freebsd-doc | |
Bruce, On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 08:51:09AM -0800, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
The problem with the installation instructions is that the content is scattered throughout several files and there is not any single $FreeBSD$ tag you (or anybody) can use to give the latest revision date for the document as a whole.
I hate it when you are right and have to ditch one of my half-cooked ideas into the trashcan. Obviously, adding a visible $FreeBSD$ tag to each file would look... strange.
I *think* you can do this for the installation guide as well, and I wouldn't object to somebody doing this if it can be made to work.
Why do I get the nasty feeling that this will be more complicated than just doing a gigantic cat * > newfile.sgml?
It can't be done for the hardware notes, because there are some MD files.
Which mean that even if I manage to add a usefull publication date to the installation instructions, I am still short of my target of having a way to automatically identify the parts of the rendered release notes that are out of date... short of building them and running diff, that is.
/s/Udo
-- "41.6: Ersetzen von Austauschen" (HP Color LJ 5M Fehlermeldung) "41.6: Replace Coating Kit" (das englische Original dieser Meldung)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo...@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message