libDXF

'install' target missing in refguides

Bug #1400884 reported by Bert Timmerman
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
libDXF
Fix Committed
Low
Unassigned
libDXF 0.0.1

Bug Description

On 08-12-2014 reported by dinkel as issue #21 (https://github.com/bert/libdxf/issues/21):

When running sudo make install, I get an error reporting, that no target named 'install' was specified in doc/refguides/R*. Here's the error:

[SNIP]
Making install in doc/refguides/R10
make[1]: Entering directory '/home/dinkel/Development/thirdparty/libdxf/doc/refguides/R10'
make[1]: *** No rule to make target 'install'. Stop.
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/dinkel/Development/thirdparty/libdxf/doc/refguides/R10'
Makefile:473: recipe for target 'install-recursive' failed
make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1
$

A simple fix, was to add empty 'install' targets in the doc/refguides/R*/Makefile like so:

xml_SOURCES := $(wildcard *.xml)

html_TARGETS := $(patsubst %.xml,%.html,$(xml_SOURCES))

%.html: %.xml
    xmlto html-nochunks $<

.DEFAULT_GOAL := all

all: \
    $(html_TARGETS)

clean:
    rm -f *.html *~

install:

I don't know, if I am doing something wrong or why this has not been detected before?! Also my "fix" seems to be quite crude, maybe there is a nicer solution like not calling these Makefiles for 'install'...

However I could create a pull request for this fix if you wished so, just tell me.

Thanks,

Christian

See original description
Tags: building
Revision history for this message
Bert Timmerman (bert-timmerman) wrote :

On 08-12-2014 bert wrote:

Hi Christian,

Patches and pull requests are very welcome.

Please note that libdxf still is not in a usable state.

A somewhat working version 0.0.1 still needs to be released.

Thanks in advance,

Bert Timmerman.

description: updated
Changed in libdxf:
status: New → Incomplete
status: Incomplete → Confirmed
importance: Undecided → Low
Revision history for this message
Bert Timmerman (bert-timmerman) wrote :

On 09-12-2014 dinkel wrote:

Hi Bert,

I have been looking into the autotools configuration, in order to create a decent patch.

The hack above isn't nice enough and it would only fix the 'install' target, while there is at least one commonly used 'distclean' that would not be targeted. Therefore I suggested to replace the "static" Makefile in these directories with Makefile.am files for inclusion in the autotools process.

The question that now arises is, what did you have in mind with these reference guides?

Should they (either in raw XML format or in the "compiled" HTML format) be included in a future package?

Or are they just here for helping developers create this library and not be published?

Revision history for this message
Bert Timmerman (bert-timmerman) wrote :

On 09-12-2014 bert wrote:

Hi Christian,

I agree on all of the above reasons and goals, and a Makefile.am is the way to go.

I just don't like to force yet another dependency (xmlto) upon users, maybe it is better to include the generated html files in a "dist" target (package only) and keep the xml files for "maintainer mode" (package builders and power users).

Haven't figured how to create a pdf from xml too (xsl stylesheet anyone ?).

Anyway I want to keep the xml files under version control, for I dislike to edit raw html.

Kind regards,

Bert Timmerman.

Revision history for this message
Bert Timmerman (bert-timmerman) wrote :

On 09-12-2014 bert wrote:

Hi Christian,

Your commits look like the can be applied as they are now (ready for a pull request ?).

Or do you want to tweak some more ?

Maybe I should open a new issue on the packaging of html files ?

Thanks and kind regards,

Bert Timmerman.

Revision history for this message
Bert Timmerman (bert-timmerman) wrote :

On 09-12-2014 dinkel wrote:

Hi Bert,

So far my branch switches to Makefile.am and fixes the issue I opened.

It does not deal with 'dist' targets however. In order to keep things separate, I think your idea to open a new issue for the packaging is a good idea.

I'm going to create a pull request right now.

Revision history for this message
Bert Timmerman (bert-timmerman) wrote :

On 09-12-2014 dinkel wrote:

As discussed, this pull request fixes issue #21 by intruducing Makefile.am to the refguide folders.

Revision history for this message
Bert Timmerman (bert-timmerman) wrote :

On 09-12-2014 bert wrote:

bert merged commit 8cf79f8 into bert:master from dinkel:fix-make-install-refguides

--

Hi Christian,

Thanks !

Kind regards,

Bert Timmerman.

Bert Timmerman (bert-timmerman)
Changed in libdxf:
status: Confirmed → Fix Committed
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.
Subscribing...

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.