On 22 April 2018 at 10:28, Mathieu Lirzin <mthl@gnu.org> wrote:

>
> >  $(srcdir)/foo.1: foo.c foo$(EXEEXT)
> >  -@case '$?' in \
> >  *foo.c*)
> >  ​​$(AM_V_P) && set -x || echo " HELP2MAN $@"; \
> >  LANGUAGE= help2man --output="$(srcdir)/foo.1" ./foo$(EXEEXT);; \
> >  *) : ;; \
> >  esac;
> >
> > Nice! The one thing I don't understand: why is "-" needed at the start
> > (i.e. why do we need to ignore failure of this command?).
>
> I don't recall exactly the reason Guix added it, I guess it was to allow
> the build to "succeed" even if the man pages generation failed since
> that doesn't impact the software to run.  However I am not sure if it's
> a good idea.
>

Ah, I guess it could fail because if help2man is not available. The code I
supplied​ uses "missing" instead.

IIUC this case silently ignores when the ‘beetle.1’ is not distributed,
>

​It is distributed. This is important to cover the case where help2man is
not available.​

Note that the command would not work anyway under make distcheck, as it
would attempt to write to a non-writable directory, and this case is
explicitly handled.

-- 
https://rrt.sc3d.org