groff
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: do not install *.in files (was: building groff without makeinfo)


From: G. Branden Robinson
Subject: Re: do not install *.in files (was: building groff without makeinfo)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 23:33:52 +1100
User-agent: NeoMutt/20180716

Hi Ingo!

At 2022-03-30T13:25:24+0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> G. Branden Robinson wrote on Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 06:15:51AM +1100:
> 
> > Building groff from a distribution archive (_not_ from Git),
> > should NOT require makeinfo(1) anymore.
> > Can you confirm that this is the case on OpenBSD?
> 
> Fist good news:
> After some more testing, i can now definitely confirm that this works.

Excellent!

> Second good news:
> Earlier, i mentioned that i saw a few instances of unclean behaviour
> in the build that i didn't investigate at that point.  Fortunately,
> closer inspection revealed that all but one of those were only
> related to building the OpenBSD port and only a single one is
> relevant for upstream.
> 
> That one issue is that "make install" installs the following files:
> 
>   meintro.me.in meintro_fr.me.in meref.me.in msboxes.ms.in
> 
> in addition to the processed versions without the *.in suffix.
> 
> Resolving that requires tweaking some automake(1) variables
> in the *.am input files.
> 
>  1. dist_sboxesexample_DATA is completely bogus, so delete it.
>     In automake(1), the _DATA suffix means "install this",
>     and *.in files obviously must not be installed.

Right.

>  2. Instead, the file msboxes.ms.in only needs to be packaged
>     in the distribution tarball.  The way to do that in automake(1)
>     is adding the file to EXTRA_DIST.  Actually, the required
>     EXTRA_DIST line is already there by hidden by an "#if".
>     It needs to be set unconditionally because that file always
>     needs to be added to distribution tarballs.

Acknowledged.

>  3. These changes make the preceding comment inaccurate because
>     msboxes.ms.in is no longer installed.
>     Trying to reaword the comment, i found that all of it was
>     obviosly written by Captain Obvious:
>     "SBOXES_EXAMPLEFILES are located in the source tree"
>       That is obvious from "SBOXES_EXAMPLEFILES = $(sboxes_srcdir)/...".
>     "SBOXESPROCESSEDEXAMPLEFILES are generated in the build tree"
>       Obvious from "SBOXES_PROCESSEDEXAMPLEFILES = $(sboxes_builddir)/...".
>     So let's just delete the whole comment with no replacement.

Agreed.

>  4. In doc.am, split DOCFILES into those files that have to be
>     installed and those that don't.

Okay.

>  5. The _DATA installation variable gets only DOCFILES_INST.
> 
>  6. DOCFILES_NOINST needs to be added to EXTRA_DIST unconditionally.

I believe Automake already has an idiom for this, the "noinst_" prefix.

https://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/Uniform.html

Maybe it can't be applied to this situation; I'm not sure.

> Tested in builds both from git and from tarballs.
> 
> When committing, i will include ChangeLog entries.
> 
> OK to push?

Please look into the noinst thing; apart from that I'm a +1 on all of
this.

Regards,
Branden

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


reply via email to

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