[opensuse-factory] netpbm documentation problems
[netpbm 10.35.77-3.2] There is a discrepancy between the netpbm manpages and its binaries. For example, pngtopnm --version gives pngtopnm: Using libnetpbm from Netpbm Version: Netpbm 10.35.77 pngtopnm: Compiled Sat Sep 18 20:20:23 UTC 2010 by user "bryanh" pngtopnm: BSD defined pngtopnm: RGB_ENV='RGBDEF' pngtopnm: RGBENV= 'RGBDEF' (env vbl is unset) However, pngtopnm.1 (contained in the same netpbm bundle) refers to a binary called `pngtopam' which has been added in Netpbm 10.44, and indeed, the manpage for pngtopam is part of the netpbm bundle but the binary is missing... BTW, there is a slight irony: The package description starts with The latest version of the Portable Bitmap Plus Utilities. [...] But version 10.35 is more than 4 years old, with the current version at 10.53 $(Q#|(B even the `stable' series of netpbm has reached 10.47 meanwhile. Werner -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 06:14:37PM +0100, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
[netpbm 10.35.77-3.2]
There is a discrepancy between the netpbm manpages and its binaries. For example,
pngtopnm --version
gives
pngtopnm: Using libnetpbm from Netpbm Version: Netpbm 10.35.77 pngtopnm: Compiled Sat Sep 18 20:20:23 UTC 2010 by user "bryanh" pngtopnm: BSD defined pngtopnm: RGB_ENV='RGBDEF' pngtopnm: RGBENV= 'RGBDEF' (env vbl is unset)
However, pngtopnm.1 (contained in the same netpbm bundle) refers to a binary called `pngtopam' which has been added in Netpbm 10.44, and indeed, the manpage for pngtopam is part of the netpbm bundle but the binary is missing...
BTW, there is a slight irony: The package description starts with
The latest version of the Portable Bitmap Plus Utilities. [...]
But version 10.35 is more than 4 years old, with the current version at 10.53 – even the `stable' series of netpbm has reached 10.47 meanwhile.
Where do you see this? http://sourceforge.net/projects/netpbm/files/ ? 10.35.78 seems to be the newest there. Ciao, Marcus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
But version 10.35 is more than 4 years old, with the current version at 10.53 $(Q#|(B even the `stable' series of netpbm has reached 10.47 meanwhile.
Where do you see this? http://sourceforge.net/projects/netpbm/files/ ?
10.35.78 seems to be the newest
This is called the `super-stable' release, older than three years (with small fixes, of course). On netpbm.sf.net there are, via SVN, two other series available, namely `stable' and `advanced'. Perhaps it makes sense to switch to `stable'? Werner -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
10.35.78 seems to be the newest
This is called the `super-stable' release, older than three years (with small fixes, of course). On netpbm.sf.net there are, via SVN, two other series available, namely `stable' and `advanced'. Perhaps it makes sense to switch to `stable'?
The very problem is that the netpbm people dislike man pages, essentially refusing to support them. They only provide HTML pages which are up-to-date, which can be converted to man pages more or less. As far as I can see, there is no special documentation available for `super-stable' or `stable'... Werner -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 07:53:19PM +0100, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
But version 10.35 is more than 4 years old, with the current version at 10.53 – even the `stable' series of netpbm has reached 10.47 meanwhile.
Where do you see this? http://sourceforge.net/projects/netpbm/files/ ?
10.35.78 seems to be the newest
This is called the `super-stable' release, older than three years (with small fixes, of course). On netpbm.sf.net there are, via SVN, two other series available, namely `stable' and `advanced'. Perhaps it makes sense to switch to `stable'?
I wanted to update even to newer netpbm than stable, but I don't want to port our patches. I have upstreamed some patches, some of them to stable, some of them to advanced. But upstream didn't accept patches like security.patch, security2.patch and similar. That's why I decided to stay on super-stable. If you want work on this, welcome. Documentation needs to be fixed, please file a bugreport or remind me manually later. Thanks, Petr
participants (3)
-
Marcus Meissner
-
Petr Gajdos
-
Werner LEMBERG