[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] disable building of docs as default
From: |
E. Weddington |
Subject: |
Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] disable building of docs as default |
Date: |
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 11:11:52 -0700 |
On 11 Nov 2002 at 9:32, Theodore A. Roth wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Joerg Wunsch wrote:
>
> :) As Thedore A. Roth wrote:
> :)
> :) > The attached patch adds the --enable-doc/--disable-doc options
> (with disable :) > the default). :) :) Couldn't we just leave
> --enable-doc the default, but simply toggle it :) iff ./configure
> finds no doxygen installed?
>
> Yes, we could do it that way. But what if doxygen is found and one of
> the other little pieces of the puzzle is missing? This usually isn't a
> problem on a unix system, but will be a problem on windows (doxygen is
> available on windows btw). This is already coming up with fig2dev
> missing on windows and I haven't found a simple work-around (like
> using cat for pngtopnm) that is gauranteed to work on all systems.
FYI, I found a Windows executable of fig2dev:
http://tech-www.informatik.uni-
hamburg.de/applets/jfig/archive/fig2dev3.2.3d-windows.zip
>
> My take on this is that we will be providing online and downloadable
> dox. The default build should be successful to get the tools installed
> with minimal problems. Besides, I don't think we should really need to
> support complaints that "avr-libc won't build because it's missing
> (for example) fig2dev, etc" when those don't mean that the lib
> couldn't be built. If the user wishes to roll their own docs, we still
> give them that option with --enable-doc.
>
> Arguably, we just disable building of the dox if a build tool is
> missing (and doesn't have a simple replacement). I tried this route
> with simulavr and it is really much harder to do because of all the
> "behind the scenes" tools that are used which then have to check for
> in the configure script.
>
> Besides, for a lot of people it might be faster to just download the
> pre-built doc than to roll their own or try to get all the tools
> working.
>
> Before the dox, the pre-req's for avr-libc were avr-binutils and
> avr-gcc. Should we really change that?
>
> In the end, I'll take the lazy, easy way out if I can until someone
> convinces me another way is better. ;-)
>
> Of course, --enable-doc should _always_ be used by the
> developers/maintainers (especially me so I can put the pre-built docs
> on the website)
>
Sounds good to me.
BTW, what schedule are you keeping with posting snapshots? I know
once a week, but when during the week?
Thanks,
Eric
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] pngtopnm, (continued)
Re: [avr-libc-dev] pngtopnm, Joerg Wunsch, 2002/11/08
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] pngtopnm, E. Weddington, 2002/11/08
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] pngtopnm, Theodore A. Roth, 2002/11/08
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] pngtopnm, E. Weddington, 2002/11/08
- [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] disable building of docs as default, Thedore A. Roth, 2002/11/11
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] disable building of docs as default, Joerg Wunsch, 2002/11/11
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] disable building of docs as default, E. Weddington, 2002/11/11
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] disable building of docs as default, Theodore A. Roth, 2002/11/11
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] disable building of docs as default,
E. Weddington <=
- [avr-libc-dev] snapshot schedule, Theodore A. Roth, 2002/11/11
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] disable building of docs as default, Joerg Wunsch, 2002/11/11
Re: [avr-libc-dev] pngtopnm, Joerg Wunsch, 2002/11/11
Re: [avr-libc-dev] pngtopnm, E. Weddington, 2002/11/11