Re: html texinfo install?

[Bob Friesenhahn]

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004, Bruce Korb wrote:

> Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>
> > I am against having separate install targets because GNU makefiles
> > normally install everything by default and that is what users should
> > expect.  Installing everything is not a problem for distribution
> > maintainers since they decide which files to package using their
> > distribution tools.
>
> When you have a tool that produces so many doc formats, I think you
> want to be able to let the user select what is wanted.  If "make install"
> implies installing html, then it implies building it, too.  That means
> "make" needs to imply making the html.  Probably the friendliest thing
> is to let the user select at, say, configure time which form(s) of
> documentation they want built and installed.  --enable-html, --disable-info,
> --enable-ps, etc. with certain defaults for certain output types.  Then,
> the debate degenerates into whether html should default to enabled or
> disabled.  I'd lean toward disabled, but I don't care much either way....

This approach is reasonable because then both expectations can be
satisfied.  Doing 'make install' installs everything which has been
requested to be installed.

The choice as to whether HTML is installed by default can be left to
the package maintainer.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden
http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen