[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing
From: |
Pierre Neidhardt |
Subject: |
bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing |
Date: |
Mon, 04 Nov 2019 10:46:55 +0100 |
Marius Bakke <address@hidden> writes:
> Pierre Neidhardt <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> From 893613a3b99c20688cc331d2926dbee28cc143d7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Pierre Neidhardt <address@hidden>
>> Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 17:36:17 +0100
>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add glib-minimal and build glib doc.
>>
>> glib documentation must be built with gtk-doc which in turn depends on glib,
>> so we need to define glib-minimal which does not depend on gtk-doc.
>>
>> * gnu/packages/glib.scm (glib-minimal): New variable.
>> (glib)[source]: Don't use `name'.
>> * gnu/packages/avahi.scm: Use glib-minimal when necessary.
>> * gnu/packages/cups.scm: Use glib-minimal when necessary.
>> * gnu/packages/gnome.scm: Use glib-minimal when necessary.
>> * gnu/packages/graphviz.scm: Use glib-minimal when necessary.
>> * gnu/packages/gtk.scm: Use glib-minimal when necessary.
>> * gnu/packages/inkscape.scm: Use glib-minimal when necessary.
>> * gnu/packages/pdf.scm: Use glib-minimal when necessary.
>
> Please mention all changed variables and inputs here, as we always do.
Sure, I didn't because I wasn't sure it was a good idea either :p
> That said, I'm not certain this is a good solution. Why do some
> packages use glib-minimal and others not? What does "necessary" mean in
> this context?
>
> What about 'hiding' the normal glib package, and expose a
> 'glib-with-documentation' variant to end users, similar to how the
> 'cmake' package works?
cmake-minimal builds the doc already, I don't see a
cmake-with-documentation. Did you mean something else?
I see a couple packages with the "-documentation" prefix, so we could
use "glib-documentation".
In a previous email, I explained that I wanted to put the documentation
in the "doc" output of glib for 2 reasons:
- For consistency with the other packages from the GTK family.
- To restore the missing "gtk:doc" output. If I understand correctly,
we don't have a provision to deprecate outputs, only packages. I
think this is a bug.
Now my current patch is admittedly not pretty.
If we fix the output deprecation feature, then glib:doc could be
forwarded to glib-documentation. And I guess we can live without
complete consistency.
Thoughts?
--
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, Pierre Neidhardt, 2019/11/03
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, Marius Bakke, 2019/11/03
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing,
Pierre Neidhardt <=
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, Marius Bakke, 2019/11/09
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, Pierre Neidhardt, 2019/11/11
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz), 2019/11/12
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz), 2019/11/12
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, Pierre Neidhardt, 2019/11/12
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz), 2019/11/12
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, Pierre Neidhardt, 2019/11/15
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz), 2019/11/15
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, Marius Bakke, 2019/11/15
- bug#37850: Glib documentation is missing, Pierre Neidhardt, 2019/11/15