Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> > Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of jue jul 01 21:52:00 -0400 2010:
> >> Is there something that makes installing dia more challenging than the
> >> other documentation build tools?
>
> > Err, I dunno -- it's just an apt-get away for me, but what will Tom say
> > when it doesn't work on his ancient HP-UX 10.20 system?
>
> I don't try to build the docs on that box anyway --- it does have
> openjade but such an old version that they don't build. In practice
> building the docs already takes much more modern infrastructure than
> compiling the source code; and besides there are many fewer people
> who care about doing it.
>
> A more interesting question is whether Marc can install a working
> version of dia on whatever he uses to wrap the tarballs.
One more issue is that the dia and png files are going to impact our
download sizes:
526k ./dia
483k ./png
If we generate the png from the dia files, we are looking at increasing
the source download by 526k and the binary downloads by 483k for all
existing images and, of course, as we add images, these sizes will
increase.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ None of us is going to be here forever. +