[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [help-texinfo] makeinfo and include problem

From: Thomas Porschberg
Subject: Re: [help-texinfo] makeinfo and include problem
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:27:15 +0200

Hi Karl,

Am Wed, 29 Mar 2006 13:24:14 -0600
schrieb address@hidden (Karl Berry):

> Hi Thomas,
>     in our project(auto[make/conf] based) we introduced texinfo
> format for documentation (in favor of our old static HTML doc).
> Happy to hear it :).
>     How to solve best this problem ?
> Well, it seems like you would probably have already considered this,
> but it would seem the easiest way would be to have root use makeinfo
> 4.8, one way or another -- change root's path or MAKEINFO setting for
> the make, change the makefiles to get the newer version, or
> whatever.  Or don't make the documentation as root in the first
> place.  Am I missing something?  Of course there's no way to
> retroactively change the behavior of 4.5 ...

Of course the behavior of 4.5 can not be changed.
But I fear users of the program will stumble over this problem.

So I thought I can somehow rewrite the 

I do not understand why at "make install" time the documentation
will be created again.
My idea was to build the documentation as normal user (therefore the
all-local target). That worked but when root is going to do a "make
install" it tries again first to execute all-local which fails(with

        rm -rf $(docdir)/help
        cp -dpR $(top_builddir)/doc/help/tora $(docdir)/help
        cp $(docdir)/help/index.html $(docdir)/help/toc.htm
        cp -dpR $(top_srcdir)/doc/help/images $(docdir)/help
        cp -dpR $(top_srcdir)/doc/help/api $(docdir)/help

manualdir = $(top_builddir)/doc/help

        echo Making HTML in $(manualdir)
        cd $(manualdir) && make html

Still any idea ?

>     In which version of makeinfo was HTML support introduced ?
> Version 4.0, released in September 1999. (As recorded in the NEWS
> file, BTW.) I haven't seen reports from anyone using a version nearly
> that old in a long time, for what it's worth.
> Best,
> Karl


reply via email to

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