Mike, Thanks for the feedback! On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:46:02 -0500 Mike Frysinger <vapier@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > So, I think that the patch is still necessary, or at least some > > solution that does not require docbook2man to build > > module-init-tools. > > i already gave you the workaround that doesnt require any patching: > > >> if you dont want man pages *regenerated* because you're patching > >> files, then simply touch them: > >> touch *.[58] This workaround sounds a lot uglier than the patch I propose, which cleanly makes docbook2man non-essential. You major complaint about the patch was : " the biggest reason i dislike this is that it opens the possibility of man pages silently being generated incorrectly on the system where the release is being made. " Would you accept a patch that adds a --enable-doc/--disable-doc option. --enable-doc is the default value, and errors out at the ./configure step if docbook2man is not available. --disable-doc would not require docbook2man and would not generate the documentation. This way, the release process is unchanged: the one that runs ./configure by default is required to have docbook2man, but all those embedded Linux build systems can pass --disable-doc if they don't care about the documentation. What do you think ? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-modules" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
