| Message ID | 1358511721-22073-1-git-send-email-thierry.reding@avionic-design.de (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi Thierry On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> wrote: > Due to the typo, none of the .xml files would end up in the release > tarball and cause make distcheck as well as builds from the tarball to > fail. > > Using $() isn't strictly necessary but other variables and expressions > use that variant already so it makes the usage consistent. That's weird. "make distcheck" should not be able to build the manpages if the XML files are not available. Also ${} is pretty standard in makefiles, isn't it? I wonder what the problem here is. At least distcheck runs fine on my machine. Regards David
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:00 PM, David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi Thierry > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Thierry Reding > <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> wrote: >> Due to the typo, none of the .xml files would end up in the release >> tarball and cause make distcheck as well as builds from the tarball to >> fail. >> >> Using $() isn't strictly necessary but other variables and expressions >> use that variant already so it makes the usage consistent. > > That's weird. "make distcheck" should not be able to build the > manpages if the XML files are not available. Also ${} is pretty > standard in makefiles, isn't it? I wonder what the problem here is. At > least distcheck runs fine on my machine. Ah sorry, I now saw the "subs" => "subst" typo. Still I wonder why distcheck works here. But the patch looks fine. Thanks! > Regards > David
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:01:59 +0100 David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:00 PM, David Herrmann > <dh.herrmann@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Hi Thierry > > > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Thierry Reding > > <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> wrote: > >> Due to the typo, none of the .xml files would end up in the release > >> tarball and cause make distcheck as well as builds from the tarball to > >> fail. > >> > >> Using $() isn't strictly necessary but other variables and expressions > >> use that variant already so it makes the usage consistent. > > > > That's weird. "make distcheck" should not be able to build the > > manpages if the XML files are not available. Also ${} is pretty > > standard in makefiles, isn't it? I wonder what the problem here is. At > > least distcheck runs fine on my machine. > > Ah sorry, I now saw the "subs" => "subst" typo. Still I wonder why > distcheck works here. But the patch looks fine. Thanks! Works here too. Pushed with David's reviewed-by. Thanks Thierry.
Hi David:
Sorry for jumping in. I pulled the ToT libdrm and it seems the manpages
will not be built("make html" does nothing), any suggestions?
P.S: I've installed xsltproc.
Mark
On 01/19/2013 12:01 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:00 PM, David Herrmann
> <dh.herrmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Thierry
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Thierry Reding
>> <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> wrote:
>>> Due to the typo, none of the .xml files would end up in the release
>>> tarball and cause make distcheck as well as builds from the tarball to
>>> fail.
>>>
>>> Using $() isn't strictly necessary but other variables and expressions
>>> use that variant already so it makes the usage consistent.
>>
>> That's weird. "make distcheck" should not be able to build the
>> manpages if the XML files are not available. Also ${} is pretty
>> standard in makefiles, isn't it? I wonder what the problem here is. At
>> least distcheck runs fine on my machine.
>
> Ah sorry, I now saw the "subs" => "subst" typo. Still I wonder why
> distcheck works here. But the patch looks fine. Thanks!
>
>> Regards
>> David
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
>
Hi Mark On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:39 AM, Mark Zhang <nvmarkzhang@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi David: > > Sorry for jumping in. I pulled the ToT libdrm and it seems the manpages > will not be built("make html" does nothing), any suggestions? The manpages should be built automatically if you do "make". Or you can try "make -C man" to built the manpages exclusively. If "make -C man" does nothing, then you don't have the docbook-xsl stylesheets on your machine, or xsltproc is missing or you passed --disable-manpages to ./configure. I think the packages for these files are called "xsltproc" and "doocbook-xsl" in most distributions. Regards David
Thanks, David. After "sudo apt-get install docbook-xsl" and configure the libdrm with "--enable-manpages", I see the manpages generated. Mark On 01/20/2013 05:17 PM, David Herrmann wrote: > Hi Mark > > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:39 AM, Mark Zhang <nvmarkzhang@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi David: >> >> Sorry for jumping in. I pulled the ToT libdrm and it seems the manpages >> will not be built("make html" does nothing), any suggestions? > > The manpages should be built automatically if you do "make". Or you > can try "make -C man" to built the manpages exclusively. > > If "make -C man" does nothing, then you don't have the docbook-xsl > stylesheets on your machine, or xsltproc is missing or you passed > --disable-manpages to ./configure. > > I think the packages for these files are called "xsltproc" and > "doocbook-xsl" in most distributions. > > Regards > David >
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 05:00:34PM +0100, David Herrmann wrote:
[...]
> Also ${} is pretty standard in makefiles, isn't it?
The curly braces are allowed and valid syntax, but I haven't seen many
uses of them. Historically only $() was a documented feature, while ${}
was accepted as equivalent but undocumented. Apparently ${} is more
common on BSD or in older makefiles. According to Wikipedia[0], the ${}
variant is "rarely used". While Wikipedia isn't necessarily an
authoritative source, it certainly corresponds with my experience in
this case.
Thierry
[0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Make_(software)
Hi Jesse On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:01:59 +0100 > David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:00 PM, David Herrmann >> <dh.herrmann@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > Hi Thierry >> > >> > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Thierry Reding >> > <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> wrote: >> >> Due to the typo, none of the .xml files would end up in the release >> >> tarball and cause make distcheck as well as builds from the tarball to >> >> fail. >> >> >> >> Using $() isn't strictly necessary but other variables and expressions >> >> use that variant already so it makes the usage consistent. >> > >> > That's weird. "make distcheck" should not be able to build the >> > manpages if the XML files are not available. Also ${} is pretty >> > standard in makefiles, isn't it? I wonder what the problem here is. At >> > least distcheck runs fine on my machine. >> >> Ah sorry, I now saw the "subs" => "subst" typo. Still I wonder why >> distcheck works here. But the patch looks fine. Thanks! > > Works here too. Pushed with David's reviewed-by. Thanks Thierry. Did you forget to push this patch? I cannot see it in upstream fdo libdrm repository. Or maybe I am just looking at the wrong place. Thanks David
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 16:54:11 +0100 David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi Jesse > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:01:59 +0100 > > David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:00 PM, David Herrmann > >> <dh.herrmann@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> > Hi Thierry > >> > > >> > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Thierry Reding > >> > <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> wrote: > >> >> Due to the typo, none of the .xml files would end up in the release > >> >> tarball and cause make distcheck as well as builds from the tarball to > >> >> fail. > >> >> > >> >> Using $() isn't strictly necessary but other variables and expressions > >> >> use that variant already so it makes the usage consistent. > >> > > >> > That's weird. "make distcheck" should not be able to build the > >> > manpages if the XML files are not available. Also ${} is pretty > >> > standard in makefiles, isn't it? I wonder what the problem here is. At > >> > least distcheck runs fine on my machine. > >> > >> Ah sorry, I now saw the "subs" => "subst" typo. Still I wonder why > >> distcheck works here. But the patch looks fine. Thanks! > > > > Works here too. Pushed with David's reviewed-by. Thanks Thierry. > > Did you forget to push this patch? I cannot see it in upstream fdo > libdrm repository. Or maybe I am just looking at the wrong place. Yeah failed to push, sorry. Should be there now.
diff --git a/man/Makefile.am b/man/Makefile.am index 25202e2..d25a293 100644 --- a/man/Makefile.am +++ b/man/Makefile.am @@ -17,7 +17,8 @@ MANPAGES_ALIASES = \ drm-ttm.7 XML_FILES = \ - ${patsubst %.1,%.xml,${patsubst %.3,%.xml,${patsubst %.5,%.xml,${patsubs %.7,%.xml,$(MANPAGES)}}}} + $(patsubst %.1,%.xml,$(patsubst %.3,%.xml,$(patsubst %.5,%.xml,$(patsubst %.7,%.xml,$(MANPAGES))))) + EXTRA_DIST = $(XML_FILES) CLEANFILES = $(MANPAGES) $(MANPAGES_ALIASES) .man_fixup man_MANS =
Due to the typo, none of the .xml files would end up in the release tarball and cause make distcheck as well as builds from the tarball to fail. Using $() isn't strictly necessary but other variables and expressions use that variant already so it makes the usage consistent. Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> --- man/Makefile.am | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)