process hangs when converting sgml documentation to PDF

Saquib Farooq Malik wrote:

openjade -D . -c
/usr/share/sgml/docbook/dsssl-stylesheets/catalog -d
stylesheet.dsl -t tex -V tex-backend -i output-print
-V texpdf-output -o postgres.tex-pdf postgres.sgml

and that's it, the prompt never comes back.

Some people have reported extremely long build times for the SGML docs
(e.g. on the order of a week of CPU time, in some cases). As far as I
know, this is a problem with the SGML toolchain, not the Postgres
documentation itself.

Can anybody please tell me why the process hangs up,
how can I get the PDf version from the sgml
documentations, using gmake.

You can get the prebuilt PDFs from:

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/

If you need to build them yourself, be prepared for it to take quite
some time...

-Neil

Hi,

On 6/7/05, Saquib Farooq Malik <saquibfarooq@yahoo.com> wrote:

Can anybody please tell me why the process hangs up

IMHO, you can try using strace (or any similar variant) to see if it's
working in the background. (There could also be a verbose param. for
jade too.) HTH.

Regards.

Volkan YAZICI wrote:

Hi,

On 6/7/05, Saquib Farooq Malik <saquibfarooq@yahoo.com> wrote:

Can anybody please tell me why the process hangs up

IMHO, you can try using strace (or any similar variant) to see if it's
working in the background. (There could also be a verbose param. for
jade too.) HTH.

Would someone report this to the SGML guys and get them to fix it?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Bruce Momjian wrote:

Would someone report this to the SGML guys and get them to fix it?

There are no SGML guys anymore. The toolchain is abandoned.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Bruce Momjian wrote:

Would someone report this to the SGML guys and get them to fix it?

There are no SGML guys anymore. The toolchain is abandoned.

Oh, you mean we are using tools from an abandoned project? What replace
it and should we be using that?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 05:59:19PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Bruce Momjian wrote:

Would someone report this to the SGML guys and get them to fix it?

There are no SGML guys anymore. The toolchain is abandoned.

Excellent :-( How about we discuss again whether to move to XML? I
assume there is a newer toolchain for that. I do have issues building
the docs here on a Debian unstable machine (not that i have researched
the problem a lot really.)

AFAIR the problem was that there wasn't a way to include certain parts
of the documentation depending on whether some symbol was defined or
not. Is that still true? Furthermore, do we use that feature and how,
and is there a way to work around the problem?

I think it is the standalone-include and standalone-ignore definitions,
isn't it?

--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]surnet.cl>)
Voy a acabar con todos los humanos / con los humanos yo acabar�
voy a acabar con todos / con todos los humanos acabar� (Bender)

Alvaro Herrera wrote:

Excellent :-( How about we discuss again whether to move to XML?

You can already use "XML" today. Go to doc/src/sgml and type "make
testxml" and you'll get HTML documentation built using XSLT
stylesheets.

The bad news, however, is that using the XSLT toolchain the state of the
print-output-generating tools is even worse. FOP crashes left and
right, PassiveTeX is unmaintained and incredibly hard to set up, and
the rest costs big cash. In fact, the only reason the DSSSL toolchain
is still barely maintained is to generate print output.

AFAIR the problem was that there wasn't a way to include certain
parts of the documentation depending on whether some symbol was
defined or not. Is that still true? Furthermore, do we use that
feature and how, and is there a way to work around the problem?

The way around that would be to use the profiling feature of the XSLT
stylesheets. But the way it's set up right now, storing the files in
SGML and converting them to XML on the fly, works out just as well.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Alvaro Herrera wrote:

Excellent :-( How about we discuss again whether to move to XML?

You can already use "XML" today. Go to doc/src/sgml and type "make
testxml" and you'll get HTML documentation built using XSLT
stylesheets.

One way to do it, is to make an RTF and then print the RTF to a file and
convert to PDF.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@surnet.cl> writes:

On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 05:59:19PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

There are no SGML guys anymore. The toolchain is abandoned.

Excellent :-( How about we discuss again whether to move to XML? I
assume there is a newer toolchain for that.

As far as I can tell, Red Hat is still depending on DocBook, so I think
that this format is not quite so dead as all that. Maybe we need to
take another look at exactly which tools we're using though ...

regards, tom lane

I have a Red Hat Linux 9.0 installed just to convert SGML to RTF, once it hangs in Fedora Core 3.

Halley

__________________________________________________
Converse com seus amigos em tempo real com o Yahoo! Messenger
http://br.download.yahoo.com/messenger/