2009/3/6 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx>: > Hi, > > On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, John Tapsell wrote: > >> 2009/3/6 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx>: >> >> > On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Jakub Narebski wrote: >> > >> >> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 01:38:27PM +0100, Matthieu Moy wrote: >> >> > >> >> >>>> * we have lots other files in git.git that are autogenerated (the >> >> >>>> documentation files, for example) >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I'm not aware of any auto-generated files that are checked in. Can you >> >> >>> give an example? >> >> >> >> >> >> man pages and html docs are commited, but in a separate branch. IOW, >> >> >> Junio abuses Git as a distribution mechanism, but keeps it totally >> >> >> separate from the actual sources. >> >> > >> >> > OK, true; but that is a totally different mechanism, unless the proposal >> >> > is to autobuild a "this would be the release tarball" branch similar to >> >> > html and man branches. >> >> >> >> I thnk the proposal was to have 'configure' branch with configure >> >> script built, similar to how 'html' and 'man' branches have built >> >> documentation in HTML and manpages format. >> >> >> >> However while toolchain needed to produce documentation (asciidoc + >> >> xmlto) isn't, I think, something very common, in my opinion autoconf is >> >> something that is present on systems containing other build tools >> >> required to build git from sources. So 'configure' branch is not, I >> >> think, as necessary as 'html' and 'man' branches; additionally 'html' >> >> branch (or the repository used to build documentation, or the byproduct >> >> of building documentation) is used to generate on-line docs for git. >> > >> > Plus, keep in mind that autoconf support is only an afterthought in Git; >> > Just running "make" is supposed to work. If it does not, patches are >> > certainly welcome, I think. >> >> Well now that you mention it.. :-) >> >> It doesn't check for the existance of asciidoc, but blindly assumes it >> exists. And even if you do have asciidoc, there's a good chance that >> you have the wrong version. The INSTALL file says that asciidoc >> requires 8.2.7 but most distros (debian, ubuntu. probably other) have >> 8.2.6. >> If you compile the docs with the wrong asciidoc version, there is no >> warning or error at all. It just builds incorrect man pages. > > Frankly, I was talking about "make". I never needed asciidoc there. > > Besides, if it is really an itch of yours, maybe you can come up with a > patch checking for a correct asciidoc version? Only if asciidoc would be > needed at all, of course. Yep. I've been looking at it for the last half hour, but configure.ac syntax defeats me :-D (I figured getting the check into configure.ac would be a good first start) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
