From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11947 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2011 14:27:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 11550 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Oct 2011 14:27:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 14:26:51 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B4792BAF9D; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:26:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id eyDV7CjNAkyk; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:26:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D26432BAF9A; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:26:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 251B0145615; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:26:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 14:35:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Pedro Alves , Andreas Schwab , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Ulrich Weigand , eliz@gnu.org Subject: Re: [patch] New test+use texinfo @click - @HAVE_MAKEINFO_CLICK@ [Re: doc build failure (Re: [patch 04/12] entryval#3: Virtual tail call frames)] Message-ID: <20111025142647.GA12860@adacore.com> References: <201110102256.34728.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20111011233417.GA17487@host1.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111011233417.GA17487@host1.jankratochvil.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg00656.txt.bz2 Hi Jan, > gdb/ > 2011-10-10 Jan Kratochvil > > Fix compatibility with texinfo versions older than 4.12. > * Makefile.in (MAKEINFO): Set to @MAKEINFO@. > (MAKEINFOFLAGS, MAKEINFO_EXTRA_FLAGS, MAKEINFO_CMD): New. > (MAKEHTMLFLAGS): Use MAKEINFO_CMD. > (FLAGS_TO_PASS): Add MAKEINFOFLAGS and MAKEINFO_EXTRA_FLAGS. > * configure: Regenerate. > * configure.ac (MAKEINFO): Find it, from libiberty/configure.ac. > (MAKEINFOFLAGS): Pre-set it to --split-size=5000000. > (MAKEINFO_EXTRA_FLAGS): New test for -DHAVE_MAKEINFO_CLICK. There is one bit that I don't understand: > --- a/gdb/configure.ac > +++ b/gdb/configure.ac > @@ -87,6 +87,38 @@ PACKAGE=gdb > AC_DEFINE_UNQUOTED(PACKAGE, "$PACKAGE", [Name of this package. ]) > AC_SUBST(PACKAGE) > > +# Do we have a single-tree copy of texinfo? Even if we do, we can't > +# rely on it - libiberty is built before texinfo. > +AC_CHECK_PROG(MAKEINFO, makeinfo, makeinfo, ) > +if test "x$MAKEINFO" = "x"; then > + AC_ERROR([makeinfo is required for compilation]) Why do we error out if makeinfo is not available? I think we should do the same as other projects such as binutils where we display a warning ("makeinfo is missing, documentation will not be built"), and then continue. We used to be able to build without requiring makeinfo, and installing makeinfo on all machines on our network would be a real pain. For us, we know how to work around the problem (configure with MAKEINFO=true), but less experience users might not. Let me know what you think, and I'll see if I can whip up a patch. -- Joel