Let me give the pros (+) and cons (-) of a few selected possibilities:
Source only:+ smaller distribution package.- inaccessible on systems without groff.
Uncompressed formatted only:+ accessible even on systems without groff.- the user can't generate a dvi or postscript file.- waste of disk space on systems that also handle compressed pages.
Compressed formatted only:+ accessible even on systems without groff.- the user can't generate a dvi or postscript file.- which compression format would you use? .Z? .z? .gz? All of them?
Source and uncompressed formatted:+ accessible even on systems without groff.- larger distribution package- some systems may expect compressed formatted man pages.- redundant information on systems equipped with groff.
IMHO it is best to distribute source only. The argument that it's inaccessible on systems without groff does not matter. The 500+ man pages of the Linux Documentation Project are source only. The man pages of XFree86 are source only. The man pages from the FSF are source only. In fact, I have rarely seen software distributed with formatted man pages. If any sysadmin is really concerned about having man pages accessible then he also has groff installed.
Закладки на сайте Проследить за страницей |
Created 1996-2024 by Maxim Chirkov Добавить, Поддержать, Вебмастеру |