GNU bug report logs - #43479
Generated files ’doc/os-conf-*.texi’ and “make“

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 43479 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#43479: Generated files ’doc/os-conf-*.texi’ and “make“
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 22:18:51 +0200

On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 at 14:15, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > because the 3 .texi files have to be generated first; with another
> > rule.  It seems expected that ‘make info’ builds the manual.
>
> Yeah, it’s complicated; concretely, you have to run ‘make’.

Well, I am doing for such case: make RET C-c C-c C-c Because the files
are generated at the very beginning.


> > Furthermore, ‘make distclean’ does not remove these files.
>
> It’s on purpose: those files are part of the distribution (they’re in
> the tarball ‘make dist’ creates).

Hum?  Ok.


> The reason seems to be that:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> # Bundle this file so that makeinfo finds it in out-of-source-tree builds.
> BUILT_SOURCES        += $(OS_CONFIG_EXAMPLES_TEXI) $(TRANSLATED_INFO)
> EXTRA_DIST           += $(OS_CONFIG_EXAMPLES_TEXI) $(TRANSLATED_INFO)
> MAINTAINERCLEANFILES  = $(OS_CONFIG_EXAMPLES_TEXI) $(TRANSLATED_INFO)
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Yah, I have tried to tweak a lot of stuff and it has always failed.
Simon's relationship with configure and Makefile.am: is complicated.
:-)
Well, since these files are only a hard copy of files in
gnu/system/examples/, does it make sense to simply symlink them and
remove the rule?

Cheers,
simon

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.