Re: GNUmakefile and autogsdoc

[Martin Kalbfuß]

by

Martin Kalbfuß wrote:
> 
> Hi Community, 
> 
> I'm new to gnustep. I try to set up a GNUmakefile. But I'm not sure how to
> organize the source distribution for my library. 
> 
> My current distribution directory structure consists only of one
> directory. No sub projects or something. All files are in this directory.
> It looks like: 
> 
> sdlwrap 
> | 
> +-- rect.h 
> +-- rect.m 
> +-- error.h 
> +-- error.m 
> +-- timer.h 
> +-- timer.m 
> +-- helpers.h 
> +-- helpers-m 
> +-- GNUmake 
> 
> My current GNUmakefile is 
> 
> include $(GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES)/common.make 
> 
> LIBRARY_NAME = sdlwrap 
> DOCUMENT_NAME = sdlwrap 
> 
> sdlwrap_OBJC_FILES = error.m \ 
>                      helpers.m \ 
>                      rect.m \ 
>                      timer.m 
> 
> sdlwrap_HEADER_FILES = error.h \ 
>                        helpers.h \ 
>                        rect.h \ 
>                        timer.h 
> 
> sdlwrap_HEADER_INSTALL_DIR = sdlwrap 
> 
> sdlwrap_AGSDOC_FILES = error.h \ 
>                    helpers.h \ 
>                    rect.h \ 
>                    timer.h 
> 
> sdlwrap_AGSDOC_FLAGS = -MakeFrames YES 
> 
> include $(GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES)/documentation.make 
> include $(GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES)/library.make 
> 
> As you can see from the Makefile, I create some documentation from the
> headers with autogsdoc. But the problem is, that I have to name the
> documentation "sdlwrap" like the library to get a correct install
> directory for the documentation and a correct title for the documentation.
> But when I do this the created documentation is stored in a subdirectory
> called sdlwrap which is confusing.  Better would be doc or documentation.
> I can add the -DocumentationDirectory option to AGSDOC_FLAGS, but then
> make clean doesn't work for the documentation. 
> 
> What's the right way to go? Is there a variable to set the output
> directory?
> 

I solved the problem with an aggregate. The documentation is now separated
from the library. It works fine but it feels wrong, because the
documentation isn't really an own project. It's a part of the library. So
wouldn't it be correct if the library project type has its own documentation
variables? 
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/GNUmakefile-and-autogsdoc-tp24758923p24764716.html
Sent from the GNUstep - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.