[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 'toolman_MANS' not supported?

From: Stepan Kasal
Subject: Re: 'toolman_MANS' not supported?
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 11:29:11 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/

Hello Harald,

> * Harald Dunkel wrote on Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 01:04:25PM CEST:
> >     toolmandir = ${prefix}/tooldir/man
> >     toolman_MANS = hello.1
> >
> > does not work. Did I miss something in the documentation here?

I agree with Ralf that this behaviour corresponds to the documentation.

But `toolman_MANS' is silently ignored, as is `mam_MANS' or
`gee_TEXINFOS'.  IOW, the usual check for typos or undefined geedir
variable is not performed for these two primaries.
There is definitely a space for improvement here; as usual, patches
are welcome.  ;-)

The implementation problem is that "MANS" and "TEXINFOS" are not
processed by `am_primary_prefixes' beacuse they do not fit well into
the dir_PRIMARY scheme explained in

The reason is that the semantics of these two primaries does not
really fit into the uniform naming scheme, there is too much magic

With the `MANS' primary, we have this:
man_MANS installs into subdirs of mandir, man<X>_MAN
(where <X> stands for a section name) changes the name of the file
and installs into man<X>dir.

It looks like two discrete kind of magic.  Which of the two shall
apply to general foo_MANS?
It seems that even writing a specification for the genreal `MANS'
primary presents some work, even before any line of code is written.
Again, volunteers are welcome.

Have a nice day,
        Stepan Kasal

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]