Re: Generating package HTML for Octave Forge

[Mike Miller]

On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 12:58:49 +0200, Daniel Kraft wrote:
> Does this look fine, or should I be doing something different?

I looked at a few pages and they look correct to me. The missing style
will be filled in when it is added to the Forge site.

> I have two issues with the resulting HTML, though:
> 
> 1) For functions with multiple signatures (for instance,
> ls_solve_stationary [4]), the HTML looks very odd (with the second
> signature intended).  It looks fine in Octave's help.  Is this expected
> behaviour of generate_html, or is my Texinfo syntax wrong to produce
> this kind of output?
> 
>   [4] http://extra.domob.eu/level-set/function/ls_solve_stationary.html

I suspect this may be due to Texinfo 5. Are you able to run
generate_html using Texinfo 4? I keep a copy of Texinfo 4.13 around and
set Octave's makeinfo_program to point to it when building package HTML.
I don't remember specifically which problems were due to Texinfo 5, but
there are some.

> 2) A lot of functions have demos, but with *none* of them the resulting
> HTML includes a correct picture.  Is this a problem with my installation
> of generate_html, or a bug in it?  It happens even if I add a trivial
> demo like
> 
>   x = linspace (-pi, pi, 100);
>   plot (x, sin (x));

And I think this is due to FLTK not being able to print non-visible
figures. If you set graphics_toolkit to gnuplot for building package
HTML docs you should get the correct demo plots.

-- 
mike