guix-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bug#65479] [PATCH core-updates v2 03/62] gnu: docbook-xml-5.1: Fix URIs


From: Bruno Victal
Subject: [bug#65479] [PATCH core-updates v2 03/62] gnu: docbook-xml-5.1: Fix URIs in catalog.xml.
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 16:23:36 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird

On 2023-10-05 20:23, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
>> +                    ;; The .zip release mistakenly uses '5.1CR4' instead of
>> +                    ;; '5.1' as intended by 
>> <https://docbook.org/xml/5.1/catalog.xml>.
>> +                    #~(substitute* "schemas/catalog.xml"
>> +                        (("5\\.1CR4") #$version)))))
> 
> Fun!  Is this known upstream?

No idea. (it doesn't look obvious where issues should be reported to)
The upstream is rather strange IMO: the .zip releases don't seem
to get updated (otherwise we'd see docbook-xml-4.1.2 retrofitted with
a catalog.xml instead of leaving it up to distros to figure this one
out in painful ways) and the files in the .zip don't match against
the files in their HTTP mirror [1].

You can see that [2] doesn't have the bogus entries that are in the
zip release [3].

My guess is that the HTTP mirror gets “hotfixes” but the .zip release
is the original release that is left frozen in time.

Other fun extras:
There seems to be a OASIS “upstream” as well [5][6], and the URIs in
the catalog [7] for the same standard are different!!

Not only that, the OASIS “upstream” lists a 5.1.1 release [8] which
is absent from the official [4] home page.


[1]: <https://docbook.org/xml/5.1/>
[2]: <https://docbook.org/xml/5.1/catalog.xml>
[3]: <https://docbook.org/xml/5.1/docbook-v5.1-os.zip>
[4]: <https://docbook.org/schemas/5x>
[5]: <https://docs.oasis-open.org/docbook/docbook/>
[6]: <https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=docbook>
[7]: <https://docs.oasis-open.org/docbook/docbook/v5.1/cs01/schemas/catalog.xml>
[8]: <https://docs.oasis-open.org/docbook/docbook/v5.1.1/>

-- 
Furthermore, I consider that nonfree software must be eradicated.

Cheers,
Bruno.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]