Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] disable building of docs as default

[E. Weddington]

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