GNU bug report logs - #7655
conditional _TEXINFOS should be supported

Previous Next

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 7655 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at> gmx.de>
To: bug-automake <at> gnu.org
Subject: conditional _TEXINFOS should be supported
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 20:09:11 +0100

Severity: wishlist

Conditional _TEXINFOS files should be supported, i.e.,

if COND
info_TEXINFOS = foo.texi
foo_TEXINFOS = bar.texi
nodist_info_TEXINFOS = generated.texi
endif

should work to generate and install foo.{info,pdf,...} only if COND,
but distribute foo.texi and bar.texi always.  Similar with
generated.texi (except for distribution, of course).

Cheers,
Ralf

Message #8 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jack Kelly <jack <at> jackkelly.name>
To: bug-automake <at> gnu.org
Cc: 7655 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#7655: conditional _TEXINFOS should be supported
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 06:41:44 +1100

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 6:09 AM, Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at> gmx.de> wrote:
> if COND
> info_TEXINFOS = foo.texi
> foo_TEXINFOS = bar.texi
> nodist_info_TEXINFOS = generated.texi
> endif
>
> should work to generate and install foo.{info,pdf,...} only if COND,
> but distribute foo.texi and bar.texi always.  Similar with
> generated.texi (except for distribution, of course).

Disagree. foo.info should always be built, because it goes into `make
dist'. If you want to limit building for non-specific `make', then
make sure that the .info files and such all depend on `make dist', so
the tarball is correctly generated.

Agree with the remarks about not making pdfs, dvis and inhibiting
their installation.

-- Jack

Message #14 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jack Kelly <jack <at> jackkelly.name>
To: bug-automake <at> gnu.org
Cc: 7655 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#7655: conditional _TEXINFOS should be supported
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 06:42:52 +1100

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Jack Kelly <jack <at> jackkelly.name> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 6:09 AM, Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at> gmx.de> wrote:
>> if COND
>> info_TEXINFOS = foo.texi
>> foo_TEXINFOS = bar.texi
>> nodist_info_TEXINFOS = generated.texi
>> endif
>>
>> should work to generate and install foo.{info,pdf,...} only if COND,
>> but distribute foo.texi and bar.texi always.  Similar with
>> generated.texi (except for distribution, of course).
>
> Disagree. foo.info should always be built, because it goes into `make
> dist'. If you want to limit building for non-specific `make', then
> make sure that the .info files and such all depend on `make dist', so
> the tarball is correctly generated.

Further thoughts on the above: The maintainer should always have
access to `texinfo', and the user should never have to rebuild .info
files, so it seems OK to me if they're not blocked when COND is false.

-- Jack

Message #20 received at 7655 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at> gmx.de>
To: Jack Kelly <jack <at> jackkelly.name>
Cc: 7655 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#7655: conditional _TEXINFOS should be supported
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:02:29 +0100

[ no need to keep bug-automake@ in Cc:; debbugs takes care of that ]

Hello Jack,

* Jack Kelly wrote on Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 08:42:52PM CET:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Jack Kelly wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 6:09 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >> if COND
> >> info_TEXINFOS = foo.texi
> >> foo_TEXINFOS = bar.texi
> >> nodist_info_TEXINFOS = generated.texi
> >> endif
> >>
> >> should work to generate and install foo.{info,pdf,...} only if COND,
> >> but distribute foo.texi and bar.texi always.  Similar with
> >> generated.texi (except for distribution, of course).
> >
> > Disagree. foo.info should always be built, because it goes into `make
> > dist'.

Ah, a piece of logic I didn't think of.  Hmpf.

I need to reread all the long comments in automake.in, to also take the
info-in-srcdir-or-not complication into account.

> > If you want to limit building for non-specific `make', then
> > make sure that the .info files and such all depend on `make dist', so
> > the tarball is correctly generated.

I want to be able to say "no, I do not want this info file to be built
nor installed" for the user.  This is what (at least some) users need.

Also, some users need to be able to generate .texi files.  I'm not sure
if it is always sufficient to let the maintainer generate them (and ship
them plus their .info files).

> Further thoughts on the above: The maintainer should always have
> access to `texinfo', and the user should never have to rebuild .info
> files, so it seems OK to me if they're not blocked when COND is false.

I don't understand what you mean with "blocked" nor with "access to
`texinfo'".

Thanks,
Ralf

Message #23 received at 7655 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jack Kelly <jack <at> jackkelly.name>
To: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at> gmx.de>
Cc: 7655 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#7655: conditional _TEXINFOS should be supported
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 09:12:40 +1100

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at> gmx.de> wrote:
> [ no need to keep bug-automake@ in Cc:; debbugs takes care of that ]

Noted.

> * Jack Kelly wrote on Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 08:42:52PM CET:
>> > Disagree. foo.info should always be built, because it goes into `make
>> > dist'.
>
> Ah, a piece of logic I didn't think of.  Hmpf.
>
> I need to reread all the long comments in automake.in, to also take the
> info-in-srcdir-or-not complication into account.
>
>> > If you want to limit building for non-specific `make', then
>> > make sure that the .info files and such all depend on `make dist', so
>> > the tarball is correctly generated.
>
> I want to be able to say "no, I do not want this info file to be built
> nor installed" for the user.  This is what (at least some) users need.

Sure, but .info files are built as part of make dist, so just allow
maintainers to say "no, I don't want this info file to be installed"
(and no pdfs, dvis, &c. built, either).

> Also, some users need to be able to generate .texi files.  I'm not sure
> if it is always sufficient to let the maintainer generate them (and ship
> them plus their .info files).

That's currently how it's done. I just checked with automake 1.11.1 on
Ubuntu 10.10. I've maintained packages where generated .texi files are
used, and it's all fine as long as they're also distributed.

>> Further thoughts on the above: The maintainer should always have
>> access to `texinfo', and the user should never have to rebuild .info
>> files, so it seems OK to me if they're not blocked when COND is false.
>
> I don't understand what you mean with "blocked" nor with "access to
> `texinfo'".

.info files are packaged as part of `make dist', which makes `texinfo'
a maintainer tool (it's also supported by `missing', so that's more
evidence in favour, IMHO). Therefore, it seems to me that it is
reasonable that the maintainer has `texinfo' installed and the user
should never have to actually rebuild a .info file. Then it's OK to
package it and just not install it if COND is false.

-- Jack

Message #26 received at 7655 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
To: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at> gmx.de>
Cc: 7655 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#7655: conditional _TEXINFOS should be supported
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 15:46:34 +0100

On Thursday 16 December 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Severity: wishlist
> 
> Conditional _TEXINFOS files should be supported, i.e.,
> 
> if COND
> info_TEXINFOS = foo.texi
> foo_TEXINFOS = bar.texi
> nodist_info_TEXINFOS = generated.texi
> endif
> 
> should work to generate and install foo.{info,pdf,...} only if COND,
> but distribute foo.texi and bar.texi always.  Similar with
> generated.texi (except for distribution, of course).
> 
> Cheers,
> Ralf
> 
JFTR: this is basically PR/191 from the older gnats database:
 <http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=automake&pr=191>

Regards,
   Stefano

Previous Next

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