[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160812164046.1e90d549@lwn.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:40:46 -0600
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Documentation: switch to pdflatex and fix pdf
build
On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 18:54:06 +0300
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com> wrote:
> With these you should be able to get started with pdf generation. It's a
> quick transition to pdflatex, the patches are not very pretty, but the
> pdf output is. Patch 3/3 works as an example where to add your stuff
> (latex_documents in conf.py) and how.
OK, now I have a bone to pick with you.
I applied this, then decided to install the needed toolchain on the
Tumbleweed system I've been playing with; it wanted to install 1,727
packages to get pdflatex. Pandoc just doesn't seem so bad anymore.
So I switched to the Fedora system, and found myself in a twisty maze of
missing font files, missing style files, missing babel crap, etc., each
doled out to me one file per run. But I did eventually get PDFs out of
it.
The output isn't great; among other things, it seems to be about 1/2 blank
pages. But it's something.
I've applied this so we have something to play with, but it doesn't feel
like a great solution. This is the sort of installation hell that we
wanted to get away from. It makes me wonder how hard it can really be to
fix rst2pdf; I wish I could say I'll find some time to figure that out.
Sigh.
jon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists