On Jun 25, 2009, at 9:54 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Why should providing more choice make lives hard for those that have
the
choice?
Thanks! I originally skipped the context of my request on the premise
that it was uninteresting detail. In short, FreeBSD has a build-time
option for its third-party software (the "ports collection") called
NOPORTDOCS. Software installed with that option isn't supposed to
include any documentation. You'd typically use this in a server farm
where you don't need 40 copies of the autoconf manual, for example,
because you'll almost never be hacking autoconf on one of the servers
and you have a copy on your local workstation if you really need it.
You might also use that option when building packages that you'll be
installing on a tiny system, like a wireless router.
but isn't it easier to just do `rm -rf
/usr/share/doc /usr/share/man' after `make install'?
Easier than having "--disable-installdocs" or the equivalent? I don't
personally think so.
if INSTALLDOCS
MAYBEDOCS = doc
dist_doc_DATA = README
else
docdir =
endif
SUBDIRS = src $(MAYBEDOCS)
(untested).
Yielding:
Makefile.am:5: docdir was already defined in condition TRUE, which
includes condition !INSTALLDOCS ...
configure.ac:5: ... `docdir' previously defined here
make: *** [Makefile.in] Error 1
But that seems promising and I'll keep exploring. Thanks for the nudge!
But say, you aren't looking for 'make install-exec' perchance, to
install only architecture-dependent files?
Good point! I'll look there, too.
--
Kirk Strauser
The Day Companies
_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
