On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 09:09:41AM -0300, Eduardo Lima (Etrunko) wrote: > The thing to notice here is that we are talking about two different > events, one is configure and the other one is make. Make depends on the > results of configure, but there is no way to know, at configure time, > which arguments the make will receive, so the right thing to do is to > prepare for all of them. > > Checking for a dependency that will be only used in make dist is wrong > and adds unnecessary maintenance burden in autofoo files which are by > themselves already too complex to mess with. > > > I have no problem accepting patches that make "make dist" require > > asciidoc, but I think we should not build the manual by default. > > > > It is possible to have the manual built only for make dist, but I would > still keep asciidoc as a mandatory dependency. That would be a bit weird imo. Since 'make dist' is not something I expect a lot of people to run, I think it's fine to not check for what it requires in configure, we can nicely error out when someone tries to run make dist without --enable-manual. Christophe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel