On Thursday, 28 January 2016 at 15:17:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> This one is still MIA after all this time: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/4745

Use dpldocs.info. We have good docs.

On 01/28/2016 12:29 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 January 2016 at 15:17:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> This one is still MIA after all this time:
>> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/4745
>
> Use dpldocs.info. We have good docs.

That's orthogonal to this.

On 01/27/2016 04:08 PM, Martin Nowak wrote:
> Glad to announce D 2.070.0
>
> http://dlang.org/download.html
>
> This release comes with the new std.experimental.ndslice, heavily
> expanded Windows bindings, and native exception handling on 64-bit linux.
> See the changelog for more details.
>
> http://dlang.org/changelog/2.070.0.html

Found it on reddit, we should have announced ourselves: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/4356mn/d_2070_released/

Andrei

On Wednesday, 27 January 2016 at 21:08:54 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
> Glad to announce D 2.070.0
>
> http://dlang.org/download.html
>
> This release comes with the new std.experimental.ndslice, heavily expanded Windows bindings, and native exception handling on 64-bit linux. See the changelog for more details.
>
> http://dlang.org/changelog/2.070.0.html
>
> -Martin

When trying to install on Ubuntu 15.10 x64, I get this:
http://imgur.com/L4ozgC1

I didn't proceed with the installation as I don't want any possible broken things.

On Thursday, 28 January 2016 at 22:36:22 UTC, Minas Mina wrote:
> When trying to install on Ubuntu 15.10 x64, I get this:
> http://imgur.com/L4ozgC1
>
> I didn't proceed with the installation as I don't want any possible broken things.

That's strange because I installed this morning on Ubuntu 14.04 and didn't get that message. There were no issues. (As an aside, I upgraded from 2.065, and nothing was broken.)

On Thursday, 28 January 2016 at 19:46:48 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> Use dpldocs.info. We have good docs.
>
> That's orthogonal to this.

It is just another example of why I feel it is necessary to take a different direction than dmd.

On 01/29/2016 11:09 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 January 2016 at 19:46:48 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> Use dpldocs.info. We have good docs.
>>
>> That's orthogonal to this.
>
> It is just another example of why I feel it is necessary to take a
> different direction than dmd.

I see. Good point. You've probably answered this elsewhere, but I don't recall: Does that parse the source for comments on its own or does it still use dmd's json (or html) output? Unless it does the parsing 100% on its own, then it would still suffer from the issue that PR addresses.

On Friday, 29 January 2016 at 17:49:58 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> I don't recall: Does that parse the source for comments on its own or does it still use dmd's json (or html) output?

Does it on its own. (Well, except the search results page, it still uses the json, but I'm fixing that soon and the main body pages already do their own thing.)

Brian Schott's libdparse does the bulk of the work, independently of dmd. A big reason for this is that doing changes on dmd is a pain in the butt, and another one is that dmd is optimized toward compiling code (as it should be!) which isn't always ideal for doc generation (like version(Windows) docs being left out if you happen to be on a Linux box.)

So doing it myself frees me from dmd's design constraints as well as dmd's development process.

On 01/29/2016 12:53 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Friday, 29 January 2016 at 17:49:58 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> I don't recall: Does that parse the source for comments on its own or
>> does it still use dmd's json (or html) output?
>
> Does it on its own. (Well, except the search results page, it still uses
> the json, but I'm fixing that soon and the main body pages already do
> their own thing.)
>
> Brian Schott's libdparse does the bulk of the work, independently of
> dmd. A big reason for this is that doing changes on dmd is a pain in the
> butt, and another one is that dmd is optimized toward compiling code (as
> it should be!) which isn't always ideal for doc generation (like
> version(Windows) docs being left out if you happen to be on a Linux box.)
>
> So doing it myself frees me from dmd's design constraints as well as
> dmd's development process.
>

Ah, cool. I've filed this: https://github.com/Hackerpilot/Dscanner/issues/304

El 28/01/16 a les 23:36, Minas Mina via Digitalmars-d-announce ha escrit:
> On Wednesday, 27 January 2016 at 21:08:54 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
>> Glad to announce D 2.070.0
>>
>> http://dlang.org/download.html
>>
>> This release comes with the new std.experimental.ndslice, heavily expanded Windows bindings, and native exception handling on 64-bit linux. See the changelog for more details.
>>
>> http://dlang.org/changelog/2.070.0.html
>>
>> -Martin
> 
> When trying to install on Ubuntu 15.10 x64, I get this: http://imgur.com/L4ozgC1
> 
> I didn't proceed with the installation as I don't want any possible broken things.
> 

Same problem on Ubuntu 15.10 x32.

----
$ lintian -c dmd_2.070.0-0_i386.deb
Can't close(GLOB(0x9a83b5c)) filehandle: '' at /usr/share/lintian/helpers/coll/objdump-info-helper line 192
command failed with error code 123 at /usr/share/lintian/collection/objdump-info line 79.
warning: collect info objdump-info about package dmd failed
warning: skipping check of binary package dmd
----

the command exit status is 2


on lintina manpages:

----
EXIT STATUS
       0   No policy violations or major errors detected.  (There may have been warnings, though.)

       1   Policy violations or major errors detected.

       2   Lintian run-time error. An error message is sent to stderr.
----

So this is not a dmd deb package issue but Ubuntu 15.10 lintian issue. Please report it as a bug.

You can safely install dmd deb package on your Ubuntu system.

Regards,
Jordi